- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18343 MFA No. 9844 of 2018 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. 9844 OF 2018 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SMT. SHANTHAMMA W/O LATE DEVENDRAPPA @ BHIMANNA, AGE 48 YEARS, OCC:MASON, R/AT YADAHALLI, YEDALLI, ARKERE TALUK, YADGIR DISTRICT- 585216 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SURESH M LATUR., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. V. REVANTH REDDY S/O SHANKARA REDDY, NO.612, SRI THIRUMALA SYMPHONY, CHIKKATHOGUR, NEAR PRAGATHI NAGAR, ELECTRONIC CITY, BENGALURU- 560100 2. THE MANAGER ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE CO LTD., NO.186/7, RAGHAVENDRA COMPLEX, WILSON GARDEN, IST CROSS, HOSUR MAIN ROAD, BANGALORE-560027. …RESPONDENTS Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18343 MFA No. 9844 of 2018 (BY SRI. C.R.RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2; V/O DTD 12.06.25 NOTICE TO R1 IS D/W) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 21.08.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.5721/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE 2ND ADDITIONAL JUDGE & 28TH ACMM, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MACT, BENGALURU (SCCH-13), 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 filed by the injured claimant challenging the judgment and award dated 21.08.2018 passed in M.V.C.No.5721/2016 by the II Additional Judge & XXVIII ACMM, Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru (SCCH- 13) (for short, ‘Tribunal’). 2. Heard Sri Suresh M. Latur, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Sri. C.R. Ravishankar, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18343 MFA No. 9844 of 2018 learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 and perused the records. 3. This appeal is filed by the claimant seeking higher compensation, seeking to re-determine the income and disability and seeking for just and appropriate compensation on all other heads. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the insurance company supports the impugned judgment and award and submits that the Tribunal has awarded higher compensation under the head of conveyance, attendant charges etc., which can be adjusted towards the other heads and seeks to dismiss the appeal. 5. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for both sides, it is to be noticed that the appellant met with a road accident on 18.07.2016 and he was provided treatment at Bowring and Lady Curzon Hospital, Bangalore. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18343 MFA No. 9844 of 2018 6. The appellant examined himself as PW1, examined PW2, Naveen Kumar and Dr. S. A. Somashekar as PW3 and got marked Exs.P1 to P21. The respondent examined RW1 and got marked Exs.R1 and R2. The tribunal considered the income at Rs.9,000/- p.m., assessed the disability at 26% and awarded total compensation at Rs. 6,14,029/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till its realization. 7. The oral evidence off PW3 and other medical evidence on record indicates that the appellant has sustained the following fractures: i) Fracture (right) Elbow i.e., comminuted intra articular fracture lecranon with radial head dislocation (Monteggia variant) grade III A open fracture. ii) Fracture (right) humerus mid shaft with radial N injury grade III B open fracture. iii) Right sided fracture 3rd, 4th, 7th and 8th ribs. iv) Right Iliac wing fracture with extension to posterior column. v) Right sided fracture both bones leg proximal third comminuted. vi) Left sided fracture both bones, sub condyler fracture and fractures ipsilateral shafts." - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18343 MFA No. 9844 of 2018 8. PW3-doctor has assessed disability at 80% to the particular limb and 40% to the whole body. Considering the same, the tribunal assessed 26%. 9. Taking note of the aforesaid fractures and by considering the nature of surgery undergone by the appellant, I am of the considered view that, the disability is required to be assessed at 30% for the purpose of determination of compensation. Admittedly the appellant has not produced any evidence to prove his income. Hence his income is notionally reassessed at Rs.9,500/- per month, placing reliance on the notional income chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. 10. The Tribunal assessed the meager compensation and the Tribunal has not awarded any compensation under the head of loss of income during the laid-up period and awarded meager compensation under the head of loss of amenities, which is required to be - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18343 MFA No. 9844 of 2018 reassessed appropriately and the same is reassessed as under: 11. Thus, the appellant-claimant shall be entitled to total compensation of Rs.7,76,589/- as against Rs.6,14,029/- awarded by the Tribunal. 12. 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 HEADS AMOUNT (in Rs.) Loss of future income due to disability (9,500 X 12 X 13 X 30%) 4,44,600/- Pain & suffering 60,000/- Loss of amenities in life 60,000/- Food, nourishment, transportation and attendant charges 70,000/- Loss of income during laid up period (Rs.9,500 x 4 months) 38,000/- Medical Expenses 83,989/- Future Medical Expenses 20,000/- TOTAL 7,76,589 - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18343 MFA No. 9844 of 2018 appellant-claimant would be entitled to total compensation of Rs.7,76,589/- as against Rs.6,14,029/- 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) Draw modified award accordingly. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE HR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3