- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19914 MFA No. 3648 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.3648 OF 2025(MV-I) BETWEEN: SRI G. SAI GOKUL AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, S/O. N. GOPI, R/A. GANGAMMA GUDI BEEDI, YELAHANKA OLD TOWN, BENGALURU - 560 064. PERMANENT ADDRESS D. NO.5-6-321, MODEL COLONY, VTC HINDUPUR TOWN, ANANTAPURA DISTRICT. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. D. NAGARAJA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENL. INSURANCE CO. LTD. UNIT-IV, 9TH FLOOR, LEVEL-06, GOLDEN HEIGHTS COMPLEX, 59TH C CROSS, INDUSTRIAL SUBURB, RAJAJINAGAR 4TH M BLOCK, BENGALURU- 560 010. REP. BY ITS MANAGER, Digitally signed by PADMASHREE SHEKHAR DESAI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19914 MFA No. 3648 of 2025 2. SRI. BOYA KRISHNAMURTHY, S/O. SREERAMULU B, D. NO.1-103, KORUBANDALAPALLI, PENUKONDA, ANANTAPURA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. H.C. BETSUR, ADVOCATE FOR R1; V/O DATED 10.09.2025, NOTICE TO R2 IS D/W) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 01.08.2024 PASSED IN MVC NO.4537/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE VII ADDITIONAL SCJ AND ACJM, MEMBER, MACT-3, BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA ORAL JUDGMENT Heard the arguments of both sides. 2. This appeal is filed by the appellant under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, challenging the judgment and award dated 01.08.2024 passed in MVC No.4537/2022 by the VII Additional SCJ and ACJM, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19914 MFA No. 3648 of 2025 Member, MACT-3, Bengaluru (for short, 'the Tribunal') seeking enhancement of compensation. 3. The injured claimant met with an accident on 03.07.2022 and filed a claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.40,00,000/-. The Tribunal, after considering the entire evidence on record granted an amount of Rs.8,29,624/- with interest at 6% per annum from the rate of petition till realisation. 4. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant preferred an appeal, mainly contending that he was aged 24 years, working as an employee at KIA Company and earning Rs.20,000/- per month. He examined the doctor as PW.2, who assessed the physical disability of the right lower limb at 36%, left lower limb at 49% and 25% to the whole body. However, the Tribunal erred in considering the same as 15% without any basis. He was admitted to the hospital for a period of 19 days on different occasions. 5. The appellant sustained three major fractures. The Tribunal granted meager amounts under various - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19914 MFA No. 3648 of 2025 heads. PW.2 stated that the appellant requires another surgery for removal of the implants and estimated the cost at Rs.60,000/-. However, the Tribunal granted only Rs.30,000/-. He is also entitled for 40% towards future prospects and thus requested for enhancement of the compensation. 6. Learned counsel for respondent No.1 submitted that PW.2 is not the treated doctor and has clearly stated that the fractures have united. Considering the said aspect, the Tribunal rightly assessed the disability at 15%, which needs no interference. 7. Though the learned counsel for the appellant contended that he was employed and earning, no documentary proof of income has been produced. As the accident occurred in the year 2022, his notional income is to be taken at Rs.15,500/- as per the chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. He was aged 21 years and the appropriate multiplier is '18'. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19914 MFA No. 3648 of 2025 8. Exs.P-12 is the wound certificate and Exs.P-8 to P-11 are the discharge summaries. The appellant also examined an Orthopedic surgeon as PW-2, who stated that the appellant sustained fractures of the right and left femur and a right ankle bimalleolar fracture and assessed the whole body disability at 25%. 9. The appellant was treated at Dr. KSAR Gaffoor Hospital, where CRIF with IMIL nail was performed for the left femur on 06.07.2022, CRIF for the right femur on 14.07.2022 and ORIF for the right ankle on 18.07.2022. He was discharged on 21.07.2022. He was on regular follow-up and was later admitted to AR Multi Speciality Hospital on 29.03.2023 with non-united of the right femur, for which he underwent dynamisation and PRP infiltration and was discharged on 30.03.2023. The appellant now complains of pain in both lower limbs, inability to sit, squat or sit cross-legged, and difficulty in lifting weights.He has a waddling gait, restricted movements of both hips and knees, and wasting of lower limb muscles. Recent X-rays - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19914 MFA No. 3648 of 2025 of both femurs show united fractures with implants in situ. The doctor stated that the appellant has physical disability of 36% in the right lower limb and 49% in the left lower limb, with whole body disability at 25%. He further stated that the appellant requires another surgery for removal of implants, estimated cost at Rs.60,000/-. 10. In the cross-examination, he admitted that he is not a treated doctor. He stated that the fractures have united with implants in situ. There is no fracture involving the hip or knee joints and no restriction of movement. Implants extend from the hip joint to the knee joint. He further stated that any restriction in movement is due to the implants, there are no loss of muscle power, and no vascular deficit. He has not issued a disability certificate or any written estimate for implant removal. He also stated that the restriction in movement may reduce in future, considering the petitioner’s young age, and the disability may also decrease. Therefore, this Court finds it reasonable to assess the disability at 25%, relying on the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19914 MFA No. 3648 of 2025 medical evidence. As the disability is more than 20%, the appellant is entitled to future prospects, in view of the decision in MFA No.103807/2016 in (New India Assurance Co. Ltd Vs. Abdul S/O Mehaboob Tahasildar), wherein it is held that when the disability is more than 20%, future prospects are to be added while assessing compensation under the head ‘loss of future earning capacity’. The appellant was aged 21 years at the time of the accident, therefore, he is entitled for 40% towards future prospects. Accordingly, the loss of future earning capacity comes to Rs.15,500/- + 40% x 12 x 18 x 25% = Rs.11,71,800/-. The Tribunal awarded Rs.1,78,118/- towards medical expenses, which is hereby confirmed. 11. The appellant was hospitalized for a period of 19 days. Considering the nature of injuries, period of hospitalisation and other relevant factors, this Court finds it reasonable to grant an amount of Rs.75,000/- towards pain and suffering, Rs.40,000/- towards loss of amenities - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19914 MFA No. 3648 of 2025 and petitioner might not have attended any work at least for a period of four months. Therefore, Rs.15,500 x 4 = Rs.62,000/- is to be granted under the head loss of income during the laid-up period. 12. The Tribunal has already awarded Rs.50,000/- towards transportation, extra nourishment and attended charges and Rs.30,000/- towards future medical expenses and the said amounts are confirmed. 13. Thus, the compensation awarded by this Court is as follows: 14. The appellant/claimant is entitled to a total compensation of Rs.16,06,918/- as against Rs.8,29,624/- Particulars Amount in Rs. Loss of future income 11,71,800.00 Loss of amenities 40,000.00 Pain and suffering 75,000.00 Transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges 50,000.00 Medical expenses 1,78,118.00 Loss of income during laid- up period 62,000.00 Future medical expenses 30,000.00 Total 16,06,918.00 - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19914 MFA No. 3648 of 2025 awarded by the Tribunal. The enhanced compensation works out to Rs.7,77,294/-. To this extent, the award passed by the Tribunal is modified. 15. In the result, pass the following: ORDER i. The appeal is allowed in part. ii. The judgment and award dated 01.08.2024 passed in MVC No.4537/2022 by the VII Additional SCJ and ACJM, Member, MACT-3, Bengaluru, is hereby modified; iii. The appellant-claimant is entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.7,77,294/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till its realization. iv. Respondent No.1/Insurance Company has already deposited the awarded amount before the Tribunal. Therefore, the Insurance Company is directed to deposit - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19914 MFA No. 3648 of 2025 the enhanced compensation of Rs.7,77,294/- with interest of 6% per annum within one month from the date of this order. However, the appellant is not entitled to interest on the future medical expenses of Rs.30,000/-. v. On such deposit, the appellant/claimant is permitted to withdraw the entire amount along with interest accrued on it. Sd/- (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE TMP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 73