Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 3421 (KAR)

MR SRINIVASA v. MR NAGARAJU

MFA/98/2024 · 2026-04-06

P Sree Sudha

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18484 MFA No. 98 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. 98 OF 2024 (MV-I) BETWEEN: MR SRINIVASA S/O BANVAIAH AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS R/AT HANCHIHALLI VITHALAPURA POST MAYASANDRA HOBLI TURUVEKERE TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT KARNATAKA - 561 207 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. CHANDRASHEKARAIAH B., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MR NAGARAJU S/O MALLEGOWDA MAJOR IN AGE (AGE OF R-1 NOT KNOWN TO APPELLANT) R/AT PIRUMENAHALLI VILLAGE HANUMANTHAPURA POST HASSAN, KARNATAKA - 573 201. 2. HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE AT NO.25/1, 2ND FLOOR, BUILDING NO.2 SHANKARANARAYANA BUILDING, M.G.ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001 BY ITS MANAGER …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MALLIKARJUNA REDDY N.A., ADVOCATE FOR Digitally signed by PADMASHREE SHEKHAR DESAI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18484 MFA No. 98 of 2024 SRI. B. PRADEEP, ADVOCATE FOR R2, V/O DTD 29.10.2025, NOTICE TO R1 IS D/W) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.05.06.2023 PASSED IN MVC NO.5711/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL JUDGE AND 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 FINAL HEARING THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the appellant/claimant under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 challenging the judgment and award dated 05.06.2023 passed in MVC No.5711/2021 on the file of the II Additional Judge and ACMM, Court Of Small Causes, MACT, Bengaluru, for enhancing the compensation. 2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for respondent No.1. The ranks of the parties are retained as per tribunal for the sake of convenience. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18484 MFA No. 98 of 2024 3. The injured claimant met with an accident on 20.11.2021 and filed claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.30,00,000/-. The Tribunal considered the entire evidence on record and granted an amount of Rs.9,05,580/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from date of petition till realisation. 4. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner preferred an appeal and mainly contended that the petitioner sustained multiple fractures which are grievous in nature and was in the hospital as an inpatient for 27 days. He examined the doctor and the doctor assessed the disability of right arm and right lower limb as 76% and the whole body disability as 25%. But the tribunal has taken the disability as 18%, which is on lower side. The amounts granted by the Tribunal under other heads are meager. Therefore, requested for enhancement of compensation. 5. Though the petitioner stated that he was aged 27 years and was working as a Bore-well motor Mechanic and earning Rs.20,000/- per month, he has not filed any income proof. Therefore, as he met with an accident in the year 2021, the Tribunal has rightly considered the notional income as - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18484 MFA No. 98 of 2024 Rs.15,000/- per month, as per the chart prepared by Karnataka State legal Services Authority. He was aged 27 years and the relevant multiplier taken is ‘17’. Ex.P5 is the wound certificate and Ex.P8 is the Discharge Summary. The Petitioner also examined doctor, Orthopedic Surgeon as PW2. He stated that petitioner sustained right femur fracture, right humerus fracture and right clavicle fracture and was treated with CRIF with IMIL nail and was discharged on 17.12.2021. He had weakness, pain in the right side of the body, was unable to lift weights, unable to sit down, squat and sit cross leg. The petitioner had mild limping gait, restricted right shoulder movements, wasting of the right deltoid and arm muscles, restricted right hip movements. Recent x-ray of the right humerus right clavicle and right femur shows united fracture of the clavicle, non-union of the right femur and right humerus fractures with implant in situ. One fracture is united, one is not united. Therefore, doctor assessed the disability of right arm as 55% and that of the right lower limb as 53% and the whole body as 25%. The doctor further stated that the petitioner requires another surgery for union of right humerus and right femur fracture and the approximate cost of the surgery as - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18484 MFA No. 98 of 2024 Rs.1,20,000/-. The Tribunal, as per the avocation of the Petitioner was not proved, therefore considering nature of injuries and doctor's evidence, the total functional disability of the petitioner was considered at 18%. The Petitioner stated that he was working as a bore well motor mechanic and considering the medical issues on record, this court finds it reasonable to take the disability as 25%. As the disability is more than 20%, the petitioner is also entitled for future prospectus, as per the as per the citation in the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Abdul & Anr., in MFA No.103807/2016 (MV) passed by co-ordinate bench of this court. The Petitioner was aged 27 years, therefore, he is entitled for 40% towards future prospectus. Hence, loss of the future earning capacity comes to Rs.15,000 + 40% x 12 x 17 x 25%= Rs.10,71,000/-. Petitioner was admitted in the hospital for a period of 27 days, therefore, Tribunal granted Rs.1,42,780/- towards medical expenses, as per the relevant documents and same is confirmed. Considering the nature of injuries, period of hospitalization and other relevant factors, this court finds it reasonable to grant an amount of Rs.75,000/- for pain and suffering, Rs.50,000/- for loss of - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18484 MFA No. 98 of 2024 amenities and Rs.40,000/- for transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges. The petitioner might not have attended any other work atleast for a period of 4 months. Therefore, The Tribunal already granted Rs.60,000/- towards loss of income during laid up period and it is confirmed. This Court finds it reasonable to grant an amount of Rs.75,000/- towards future medical expenses. 6. Thus in all, components awarded by this court are as below, Sl.Nos. Particulars Amount in Rs. 1 Loss of future earning capacity 10,71,000 2 Pain and suffering 75,000 3 Loss of amenities 50,000 4 Transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges. 40,000 5 Loss of income during laid down period 60,000 6 Future medical expenses 75,000 7 Medical bills 1,42,780 Total 15,13,780 - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18484 MFA No. 98 of 2024 Hence, the compensation granted by tribunal is enhanced from Rs.9,05,580/- to Rs.15,13,780/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. 7. In the result, the following order is passed: ORDER i. Appeal is allowed in part. ii. The judgment and award dated 05.06.2023 passed in MVC No.5711/2021 on the file of the II Additional Judge and ACMM, Court Of Small Causes, MACT, Bengaluru, is modified. iii. The claimants are entitled to a sum of Rs.15,13,780/- along with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization, instead of Rs.9,05,580/- granted by the tribunal. iv. Respondent/Insurance Company has already deposited the awarded amount before the tribunal. Therefore, respondent/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs.6,08,200/- along with - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18484 MFA No. 98 of 2024 the interest at the rate of 6% within one month from the date of this order. v. On such deposit, claimant is permitted to withdraw the entire amount along with interest accrued on the same. vi. On 29.10.2025, the delay of 126 days is condoned by this Court on the condition that the claimant will not be entitled for the interest in case of enhancement. Hence, Insurance company is not liable to pay the interest for the delayed period. vii. Registry is directed to return the Trial Court records to the Tribunal, along with certified copy of the order passed by this Court within 10 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. Sd/- (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE AKV CT:NR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 73