- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18618 MFA No. 2111 of 2025 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. 2111 OF 2025 (MV-I) BETWEEN: V. LOKESH S/O. VEERABADRAIAH.M AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.34, SANTHEBIDI, PATELAMMA TEMPLE, JIGANI, ANEKAL, BANGALORE URBAN. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SREENIVASAIAH A, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. NAVEEN K. S/O. S. KANDASWAMY DHARMAPURA POST, SANTHE KEREKODI, HUNSUR TALUK, MYSORE, KARNATAKA - 571 189. 2. THE MANAGER, THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., D.O3, NO.9/2, 2ND FLOOR, MAHALAKSHMI CHAMBERS, M.G. ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. GEETHA RAJ, ADVOCATE FOR R2; VIDE ORDER DATED 06.04.2026, NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH) Digitally signed by PADMASHREE SHEKHAR DESAI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18618 MFA No. 2111 of 2025 THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 19.11.2024 PASSED IN MVC.NO.5323/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE IV ADDITIONAL JUDGE AND MEMBER, MACT & ACJM, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU, (SCCH-6), 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 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 19.11.2024 passed in MVC No.5323/2021 on the file of the IV Additional Judge & Member, MACT, ACJM, Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru, seeking enhancement of compensation. 2. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for respondent No.2/Insurance Company. The ranks of the parties are retained as per Tribunal for the sake of convenience. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18618 MFA No. 2111 of 2025 3. The petitioner/injured claimant met with an accident on 17.11.2021 and filed petition before the Tribunal for compensation of Rs.50,00,000/-. The Tribunal considering the entire evidence on record granted an amount of Rs.6,93,578/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a., from the date of filing the petition till the date of deposit. Being aggrieved by the said order, this appeal is filed and mainly contended that the petitioner/injured was working as a priest and earning Rs.30,000/- per month. Apart from this, he was also performing “Satyanarayana Pooja, Lakshmi Pooja, Ganesha Homa, Mruthyunjaya Homa, etc,” and earning Rs.10,000/- to Rs.15,000/- per pooja. He examined the doctor as PW.2, who assessed the disability of the right lower limb at 32% and the whole- body disability at 16%. But the Tribunal erred in taking the same as 14%. The petitioner was admitted to the hospital as an inpatient for 20 days. The Tribunal granted meagre amounts under the other heads. Therefore, requested for enhancement of the compensation. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18618 MFA No. 2111 of 2025 4. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 stated that the Tribunal has considered the disability at 14%, though the actual disability would come to 11% and therefore, the assessment made by the Tribunal is on the higher side. It is further contended that the Tribunal has already awarded reasonable amounts under other heads and it needs no interference. 5. Though the petitioner/injured stated that he was working as a priest and earning Rs.30,000/- per month, he has not filed any income proof. As he met with an accident in the year 2021, the Tribunal has rightly taken his notional income at Rs.15,000/- per month. The petitioner was aged 37 years and the relevant multiplier is ‘15’. Ex.P.6 is the wound certificate, and Exs.P.9 and P.10 are the discharge summaries. The petitioner has also examined the doctor as PW.2, who has stated that the petitioner sustained the following injuries and was treated conservatively. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18618 MFA No. 2111 of 2025 "Tenderness over right side of hip, x-ray pelvis: right hip posterior dislocation, CT pelvis: Right posterior wall of accetabular fracture and the doctor has opined that the injuries are grievous in nature. Right hip posterior dislocation, right posterior wall of acetabular fracture." 6. PW.2 verified the medical records and stated that the petitioner was complaining of pain and difficulty in walking and climbing stairs and assessed the disability of the right lower limb at 32% and the whole-body disability at 16%. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 contended that PW.2 is not a treated doctor. It is submitted that one- third of 32% would come to 10.6%. But the Tribunal has taken the disability at 14%. This Court finds no reason to interfere with the disability assessed by the Tribunal. Accordingly, the loss of future earning capacity is calculated at Rs.3,78,000/- (15,000 × 12 × 15 × 14%). The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.1,05,578/- towards medical expenses, as per Exs.P.11 and P.12 and the said amount is confirmed. The petitioner was hospitalized for a - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18618 MFA No. 2111 of 2025 period of 19 days. Considering the nature of injuries and the period of hospitalization, the Tribunal has awarded Rs.75,000/- towards pain and suffering and Rs.25,000/- towards loss of amenities. Further, a sum of Rs.75,000/- has been awarded towards loss of income during the laid-up period for five months and a sum of Rs.35,000/- has been awarded towards transport, attendant charges, extra nourishment and conveyance. All the amounts awarded under the other heads are just and reasonable and it needs no interference. Therefore, this Court finds no grounds to interfere with the order of the Tribunal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed, confirming the award of the Tribunal. Sd/- (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE AMA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11