Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 31266 (KAR)

KUM. LENITH QUINI OLIVER v. MR. MOHAN RAAJE ARAS

MFA/7164/2022 · 2026-07-14

Rajesh Rai K

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010481302022 NC: 2026:KHC:35989 MFA No. 7164 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.7164 OF 2022(MV-I) BETWEEN: KUM. LENITH QUINI OLIVER D/O JOHN OLIVERA AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS RESIDENT OF 3RD CROSS NEAR RAJEEVA NAGARA SANTHEKATTE POST UDUPI TALUK UDUPI DISTRICT-576 105 THE APPELLANT IS UNSOUND MIND HENCE HER MOTHER GRETTA OLIVERA IS REPRESENTED AS A MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN OR NEXT FRIEND ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT …APPELLANT (BY SRI. CHANDRASHEKARAIAH B, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MR. MOHAN RAAJE ARAS S/O LATE JAYARAAJE ARAS AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS RESIDENT OF ARASINAKUNTE NEAR SBI, NELAMANGALA BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT PIN-562 123 2. ICICI LOMBARD MOTOR INSURANCE COMPANY LTD Digitally signed by PANKAJA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010481302022 NC: 2026:KHC:35989 MFA No. 7164 of 2022 BANGALORE REPRESENTED BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER DIVISIONAL OFFICE AT MANGALORE C-22, MAXIMAS COMMERCIAL COMPLEX ABOVE ABN, A.M. RAO BANK LIGHT HOUSE HILL ROAD, MANGALORE-575 001 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B PRADEEP, ADVOCATE FOR R2, NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 17.02.2016 PASSED IN MVC NO.256/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, ADDITIONAL MACT, UDUPI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K ORAL JUDGMENT The claimant, being dissatisfied with the compensation of Rs.10,09,750/- awarded by the Tribunal in MVC No.256/2009 dated 17.02.2009, is in appeal. 2. The fact that the accident occurred and the further fact that the offending vehicle was insured is not in dispute. - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010481302022 NC: 2026:KHC:35989 MFA No. 7164 of 2022 3. The Tribunal, on assessment of evidence, has awarded the following sums as compensation: Sl. No. Particulars Amount in (Rs.) 1. Permanent physical disability 5,00,000 2. Pain and suffering 75,000 3. Loss of amenities in life 25,000 4. Towards medical expenses 2,44,750 5. Loss of educational career 75,000 6. Towards marriage prospects 50,000 7. Attendant charges, conveyance, food and nourished food 40,000 Total 10,09,750 4. It is the primary contention of the learned counsel for the claimant that the Tribunal has erred while awarding compensation by taking into consideration the law laid down by Division Bench of this Court in MASTER MALLIKARJUN VS. DIVISIONAL MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED AND ANOTHER - 2013 ACJ 2445. He also submitted that in view of the subsequent judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of MASTER AYUSH V. THE BRANCH MANAGER, RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. & ANR - (2022) 7 SCC 738 so also HITESH - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010481302022 NC: 2026:KHC:35989 MFA No. 7164 of 2022 NAGJIBHAI PATEL Vs. BABABHAI NAGJIBHAI RABARI AND ANOTHER, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal has to be modified by considering the income and other aspects, since she is a minor. Accordingly, he prays to allow the appeal. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the Insurance Company by supporting the impugned judgment contended that the Tribunal, upon assessment of oral and documentary evidence, has rightly awarded compensation, which does not call for any interference at the hands of this Court. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss the appeal. 6. I have given my anxious consideration to the submission made by the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the impugned judgment and other documents made available before this Court. 7. The Tribunal has not awarded compensation under the head 'loss of future income', since the claimant was minor aged 9 years at the time of incident. However, as the claimant has suffered disability at 90%, as per the judgment of Division - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010481302022 NC: 2026:KHC:35989 MFA No. 7164 of 2022 Bench of this Court in MASTER MALLIKARJUN Vs. DIVISONAL MANAGER, THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO., - ILR 2013 KAR 4891, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation towards disability. The said finding of the Tribunal has to be interfered with in view of the subsequent judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of HITESH NAGJIBHAI PATEL Vs. BABABHAI NAGJIBHAI RABARI AND ANOTHER in Civil Appeal No.10278/2025, wherein it is held that the calculation of loss of income necessarily has to be made in a case involving a child having suffered injury or having passed away. Consequently, since the accident was of the year 2008, it would be appropriate to assess the income at Rs.4,500/- as per the chart prepared by Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. 8. The Tribunal while awarding the compensation towards disability has assessed disability of the claimant at 90% by considering the evidence of PW.2 and gravity of injuries sustained by the claimant. PW.2-Doctor has categorically stated that the claimant has suffered diffuse axonal injury on the head and surgery was done and there was - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010481302022 NC: 2026:KHC:35989 MFA No. 7164 of 2022 a permanent disability. Further, the claimant is unable to walk without the help of walker and unable to perform her day to day activities without the help of attendant. In such circumstances, considering the nature of the injuries and evidence of PW.2 and medical records, I am of the considered view that the claimant has suffered 100% functional disability. Since the claimant was aged 09 years, multiplier would be ‘15’ and 40% requires to be added to her income towards future prospects, which would be Rs.6,300/- (4,500 + 40%). Accordingly, the compensation towards 'loss of future income' works out to Rs.11,34,000/- (Rs.6,300 x 12 x 15 x 100%). 9. Having regard to the injuries suffered by the claimant, the claimant would be entitled to a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- towards 'pain and suffering' as against Rs.75,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. 10. Having regard to the lasting effects of the injuries on the claimant, the claimant would also be entitled to a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- as against Rs.25,000/- towards ‘loss of amenities’. - 7 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010481302022 NC: 2026:KHC:35989 MFA No. 7164 of 2022 11. Since the claimant has lost her marriage prospects, the amount of Rs.50,000/- awarded by the Tribunal towards 'marriage prospects' would also stand enhanced to Rs.3,00,000/-. 12. The sum awarded as ‘medical expenses’ at Rs.2,44,750/-, being based on documentary evidence, does not call for modification and hence confirmed. 13. As far as educational career is concerned, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the claimant that she is unable to pursue her education due to accident and she is totally bedridden and not able to go to school. Considering the submission of the learned counsel that the claimant is unable to pursue her education due to accident, it is just and appropriate to award a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- towards 'loss of educational career' as against Rs.75,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. 14. Further it is submitted by the learned counsel for the claimant that permanent attendant is required to look after the day to day affairs of the claimant. In such circumstances, considering the finding of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of - 8 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010481302022 NC: 2026:KHC:35989 MFA No. 7164 of 2022 MASTER AYUSH V. THE BRANCH MANAGER, RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. & ANR - (2022) 7 SCC 738, it is appropriate to award a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- towards 'attendant charges, conveyance, food and nourishment' as against Rs.40,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. 15. Consequently, the award of the Tribunal is modified and the claimant would be entitled to the following compensation: Sl. No. Compensation under different Heads As awarded by the Tribunal (Rs.) As awarded by this Court (Rs.) 1. Permanent physical disability 5,00,000 11,34,000 2. Pain and suffering 75,000 2,00,000 3. Loss of amenities in life 25,000 2,00,000 4. Towards medical expenses 2,44,750 2,44,750 5. Loss of educational career 75,000 2,00,000 6. Towards marriage prospects 50,000 3,00,000 7. Attendant charges, conveyance, food and nourished food 40,000 5,00,000 Total 10,09,750 27,78,750 16. Thus, the claimant is held entitled to the total compensation of Rs.27,78,750/- as against Rs.10,09,750/-, - 9 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010481302022 NC: 2026:KHC:35989 MFA No. 7164 of 2022 along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till its realization. In view of the order dated 12.12.2022, the claimant-appellant is not entitled for interest for the delayed period of 1594 days in filing this appeal. 17. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the amount of compensation awarded within six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. 18. The apportionment of compensation amount shall be in terms of the award of the Tribunal. The appeal is accordingly allowed in part. Registry is directed to send back the Trial Court Records along with a copy of this judgment to the concerned Tribunal, forthwith. SD/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE HKV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22