- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18346 MFA No. 5338 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 5338 OF 2019 (MV) BETWEEN: SMT ANNEMMA W/O SRI VENKATESH AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/AT RAGHAVENDRA NILAYA 2ND CROSS, 3RD MAIN, AMARAVATHI LAYOUT, BANGARPET TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT, KARNATAKA- 563 114. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. ANIL KUMAR M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DIVIISIONAL MANAGER RELIANCE GEN INS CO LTD., UNNATI ARCADE, NO.5/111 & 6/112, 1ST FLOOR, 1ST BLOCK, DR RAJKUMAR ROAD, (1ST MAIN ROAD), RAJAJINAGAR, BANGALORE- 560 010. 2. MR NAVEEN PRASAD S/O NARAYANASWAMY MADIVALA VILLAGE, INORAHOSAHALLI POST, Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18346 MFA No. 5338 of 2019 BANGARPET, KARNATAKA- 563 114. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRADEEP B., ADVOCATE FOR R1; V/O DTD 12.01.2024, NOTICE TO R2 IS D/W) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 07.07.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.2883/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND MACT, BENGALURU (SCCH-11), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is by the injured-claimant, challenging the judgment and award dated 07.07.2018 passed in MVC No.2883/2016 by the I Additional Small Causes Judge and M. A. C. T. Bangalore (SCCH-11) (for short "Tribunal"). - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18346 MFA No. 5338 of 2019 2. Sri Prakash H.C., learned counsel for Sri Anil Kumar M., learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Tribunal has erred in assessing the income, disability and awarded meager compensation on all other heads by ignoring the oral and documentary evidence on record. It is submitted that, the Tribunal, without any justifiable reason has recorded a finding that the injured claimant has contributed to the accident to an extent of 10% by ignoring the evidence on record. Hence, he seeks to allow the appeal. 3. Per contra, Sri B. Pradeep, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.1 supports the impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal and submits that insofar as contributory negligence is concerned, the claimant in cross-examination has clearly admitted that there was no zebra crossing on the road. Despite that she made an attempt to cross the road which has resulted in accident. Hence, he seeks to sustain the finding with regard to the contributory - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18346 MFA No. 5338 of 2019 negligence. He has further submitted that the Tribunal taking note of the vocation, assessed the income at Rs.7,000/- per month, disability at 6% and awarded just compensation to the claimant and there is no scope for enhancement and seeks to dismiss the appeal. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent and perused the materials available on record. 5. The appellant-claimant and the respondent are not in dispute that the appellant-claimant sustained grievous injuries in road accident on 01.03.2016 and she was provided treatment in Bangarpet Government Hospital, R.L. Jallappa Hospital, Kolar and Hosmat Hospital and she was inpatient for a period of 8 days and undergone surgery. 6. The oral evidence of the injured claimant, PW2 Dr. Chetan A. and discharge summary at Ex.P7 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18346 MFA No. 5338 of 2019 indicate that the injured-claimant has sustained fracture as mentioned below: "left type II open distal 1/3rd tibia/fibula fracture with undisplaced anterior column fracture left acetabulum and she underwent the surgery by IMIL Nailing left tibia + W/D + closure on 02.03.2016 and lower femoral skeletal traction left lower limb on 03.03.2016 and discharged on 08.03.2016." 7. Considering the injuries sustained and materials placed on record, I am of the considered view that the disability must be assessed at 12%. 8. It is not in dispute that the injured was inpatient for a period of 8 days and underwent surgery and she was aged about 54 years. It is averred that the injured was Tailor by vocation. However, no material is placed to consider her income at Rs.10,000/- per month. However, the income assessed by the Tribunal is on the lower side. Hence, income is notionally reassessed at Rs.9,500/- as per the chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. The - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18346 MFA No. 5338 of 2019 compensation under the head loss of future prospects would be Rs.1,50,480/- (Rs.9,500x12x11x12%). 9. The evidence of PW2 indicates that after surgery implants were inserted and to remove those implants the approximate cost would be Rs. 60,000/-. It is to be noticed that the evidence of PW2 is silent with regard to the breakups to arrive at such a conclusion. Hence it would be appropriate to award Rs.30,000/- under the head of future medical expenses. 10. The compensations awarded by the Tribunal on all other heads are required to be reassessed by considering the nature of treatment provided to the appellant-claimant and the same is reassessed as under: HEADS AMOUNT (in Rs.) Pain & suffering 50,000/- - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18346 MFA No. 5338 of 2019 11. Thus, the appellant-claimant shall be entitled to total compensation of Rs.4,96,050/- as against Rs.2,60,401/- awarded by the Tribunal. 12. The finding of the tribunal in so far as contributory negligence is concerned, admittedly the jurisdictional police after the investigation filed a charge sheet against the rider of the motorcycle and the Loss of earning capacity due to disability 1,50,480/- Medical Expenses 1,65,070/- Loss of amenities in life 40,000/- Food, nourishment, conveyance and attendant charges 32,000/- Loss of income during laid-up period (9500 X 3) 28,500/- Future medical expenses 30,000/- TOTAL 4,96,050/- - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18346 MFA No. 5338 of 2019 Tribunal recorded the findings that without a zebra crossing, the claimant made an attempt to cross the road negligently. In my considered view, the said finding is required to be interfered as there is no evidence on record to indicate that there was a zebra crossing on the said road nearby and instead of using the said zebra crossing, she has made an attempt to cross the road abruptly. In the absence of any such evidence, in my considered view the finding with regard to the contributory negligence is without any evidence and the same is required to be interfered and to be set aside accordingly. Hence, the insurance company is liable to pay the entire total compensation. 13. In the result, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER i) Appeal is allowed in part. ii) The impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal is modified to an extent that the - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18346 MFA No. 5338 of 2019 appellant-claimant would be entitled to total compensation of Rs. 4,96,050/- as against Rs.2,60,401/- awarded by the Tribunal. iii) The enhanced compensation amount shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of payment. iv) The Insurance Company shall deposit the enhanced compensation amount with accrued interest before the Tribunal within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment. v) The entire compensation amount shall be released in favour of the appellant- claimant. vi) Findings on Contributory Negligence is set aside. vii) On 27.05.2024, the delay of 219 days is condoned by this Court on the condition that the claimant will not be entitled for the - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18346 MFA No. 5338 of 2019 interest in case of enhancement. Hence, respondent is not liable to pay the interest for the delayed period. viii) Draw modified award accordingly. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE HR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6