- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18658 MFA No. 5829 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 5829 OF 2024 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SMT SHOBHA W/O CHANANKRISHNAPPA NOW AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS R/AT SANTHEKALLAHALLI VILLAGE CHINTAMANI TALUK CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT …APPELLANT (BY SRI. GOPAL KRISHNA N., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI VENKATARAVANA S/O SRI YALLAPPA MAJOR IN AGE RESIDENT OF CHEELEPALLI VILLGE GOWNIPALLI POST SRINIVSAPURA TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT-563 135 2. THE BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENE4RAL INSURANCE COMANY LIMITED GOLDEN HEIGHTS 4TH FLOOR 59TH ‘C’ CROSS, 4TH ‘M’ BLOCK, RAJAINGAR BENGALURU-560 010 REP. BY ITS MANAGER …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B. PRADEEP., ADVOCATE FOR R2, V/O DATED 13.08.2025 NOTICE TO R1 IS D/W) Digitally signed by PADMASHREE SHEKHAR DESAI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18658 MFA No. 5829 of 2024 THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 06.12.2023 PASSED IN MVC NO.1608 / 2022 ON THE FILE OF VII ADDITIONAL SCJ AND ACMM, 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 This appeal is filed against the judgment and award dated 06.12.2023 passed by the VII Additional Senior Civil Judge and ACMM, Member, MACT-3, Bengaluru, in MVC No.1608 of 2022. 2. The injured claimant, aged 45 years, met with an accident on 05.02.2022, and filed a claim application claiming compensation of Rs.50,00,000/-. The Tribunal, considering the entire evidence on record, granted the compensation of Rs.25,65,126/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18658 MFA No. 5829 of 2024 3. Aggrieved by the said order, this appeal is preferred by the appellant-claimant in which it is mainly contended that the petitioner was earning Rs.25,000/- per month, but the Tribunal erred in taking her income as Rs.13,311/- per month. The compensation under the head loss of income during the laid up period was granted only for 30 days, though she took prolonged treatment and the Tribunal granted meagre amounts under the other heads. Thus, requested for enhancement of the compensation. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent insurance company contended that the doctor assessed the disability as 85% and the Tribunal has taken 80% disability as it is a scheduled injury and it is just and proper. It is further contended that P.W.5 is not a treated doctor. Thus, requested to confirm the judgment and award of the Tribunal. 5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for both sides. 6. Though petitioner stated that she was working as an agricultural coolie and earning Rs.25,000/- per month, she has not filed any income proof. As she met with an accident in the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18658 MFA No. 5829 of 2024 year 2022, this Court finds it reasonable to take the notional income as Rs.15,500/- per month as per the chart prepared by Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. The petitioner was aged 50 years and the relevant multiplier is 13. Exhibit P6 is the wound certificate and Exhibits P11 and P12 are the discharge summaries. Petitioner also examined the doctor as PW5 and he stated that petitioner sustained following injuries : 1. Severe head injury 2. Blunt injury to chest with hemothorax 3. Fracture right clavicle 4. Fracture right femur with occlusion of right SFA with Doubtful right lower limb vascularity. The doctor stated that the claimant underwent multiple surgeries in different hospitals and also underwent above knee amputation of right lower limb and ORIF with plating for right clavicle and noted the following points: Pain and Tenderness over the right hip. Above knee amputation upper 1/3rd Altered sensation over surgical scar mark Stiffness in Rt. lower limb hip joint Neuroma at the stump The doctor further stated that daily activities walking on slope, climbing steps, squatting for using Indian toilets were found to be difficult. X-ray shows amputation for right above knee upper 1/3rd and assessed the permanent physical disability of the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18658 MFA No. 5829 of 2024 limb contributed to the whole body as 85%. It is further stated that petitioner requires artificial limb prosthesis at an approximate cost of Rs.50,000/- to Rs.1,00,000/-. 7. Learned counsel for the appellant has relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of S. Ettiappan Vs. D. Kumar And Another decided on 16.10.2025 in SLP (C) No.15621 of 2025, in which it was held that right leg of the appellant was amputated below the knee. As such, he was not in a position to even stand without support, and his avocation as a labourer or loader has come to a standstill. In the said judgment, his functional disability was `taken as 100%. 8. The petitioner was an agricultural coolie and she sustained amputation of right above right leg above the knee. As such, she cannot do her work fully. Therefore, this Court finds it reasonable to take 100% disability. The petitioner was aged 50 years and therefore, 10% is to be added towards future prospects and the relevant multiplier is 13. Thus, the loss of future earning capacity comes to Rs.26,59,800/- (15,500 + 10% x 12 x 13 x 100%). Petitioner incurred - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18658 MFA No. 5829 of 2024 Rs.7,83,914/- towards medical expenses as per Exhibit P7 and Exhibit P8. The Tribunal granted said amount and it is confirmed. 9. Petitioner was admitted in the hospital for a period of 17 days as per discharge summaries. Considering the nature of injuries, the period of hospitalisation and other relevant factors, this Court finds it reasonable to grant Rs.1,00,000/- for pain and suffering, Rs.50,000/- for loss of amenities and Rs.50,000/-for transportation, external nourishment and attendant charges. PW2 stated that the petitioner requires artificial limb and he estimated the approximate cost of surgery as Rs.50,000/- to Rs.1,00,000/-. Therefore, this Court finds it reasonable to grant Rs.75,000/- for future medical expenses. 10. Thus, in all, the claimant is entitled for the compensation of Rs.37,18,714/- with interest at 6% per annum as against Rs.25,65,126/- awarded by the Tribunal. 11. The award of compensation passed by the Tribunal is modified as under: - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18658 MFA No. 5829 of 2024 Heads Amount in Rs. 1. Loss of future income 26,59,800/- 2. Medical expenses 7,83,914/- 3. Pain and Suffering 1,00,000/- 4. Loss of amenities 50,000/- 5. Transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges 50,000/- 6. Future medical expenses 75,000/- Total 37,18,714/- 12. In the result, the following order is passed: (i) Appeal is allowed in part. (ii) The Claimant is entitled for the total compensation of Rs.37,18,714/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization. (iii) The respondent insurance company has already deposited the award amount before the Tribunal, and therefore, they are directed to deposit the enhanced amount of Rs.11,53,588/- with interest at 6% per annum within one month from the date of this order. (iv) On such deposit, the claimant is permitted to withdraw the entire amount along with the interest accrued on it. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18658 MFA No. 5829 of 2024 (v) Claimants are not entitled for interest for delay period of 157 days as per IA.No.1/24 order dated 13.08.2025. Sd/- (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE CS CT:NR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 79