- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21712 M.F.A. No.2309/2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.2309/2019 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SMT. T.V. SHANTA W/O T.A. NARASIMHA MURTHY AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS R/AT NO.2428, SECTOR "B" III PHASE, YELAHANKA NEW TOWN BANGALORE-64. &APPELLANT (BY SRI. SHRIPAD V. SHASTRI, ADV.,) AND: 1. SRI. V. KRISHNA MURTHY MANAGING TRUSTEE MATHRU CHAYA TRUST NO.121/26, 16TH MAIN BSK IST STAGE, II BLOCK HANUMANTH NAGAR BANGALORE-50. 2. HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD NO.14, HM GENEVA HOUSE CUNNINGHAM ROAD BENGALURU-560068. &RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B. PRADEEP, ADV., FOR R2 NOTICE TO R1 IS D/W) - - - THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 03/01/2019, PASSED IN MVC Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21712 M.F.A. No.2309/2019 NO.1575/2016, ON THE FILE OF THE IX ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE & XXXIV ACMM., COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MEMBER, MACT-7, BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is by the injured claimant challenging the judgment and award dated 03.01.2019 passed in M.V.C.No.1575/2016 by the IX Additional Small Causes and Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore (SCCH-7) (for short, 'the Tribunal'). 2. Sri.Shripad V. Shastri, learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the appellant was aged about 63 years and she met with a road accident and sustained severe head injuries. It is submitted that the appellant was provided treatment in different hospitals on different occasions which can be seen from paragraphs 12 to 14 of the judgment. It is further submitted that the Tribunal, without any reasons assessed the disability at - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21712 M.F.A. No.2309/2019 18% which is contrary to the evidence of PW-4. It is also submitted that the award of compensation on all other heads is also on the lower side. Hence, he seeks to enhance the same appropriately by allowing the appeal. 3. Per contra, Sri.B.Pradeep, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2 supports the impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal and submits that PW- 4, in his evidence, has not given any break-ups as to how he has come to the conclusion that the appellant has suffered disability to the whole body to an extent of 47.33%. It is submitted that the Tribunal, taking note of the injuries suffered by the appellant and the treatment taken by her, has awarded a just and fair compensation and there is no scope for enhancement. Hence, he seeks to dismiss the appeal. 4. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21712 M.F.A. No.2309/2019 respondent No.2 and meticulously perused the material available on record. 5. The material on record indicates that the appellant met with a road accident on 06.05.2015 and sustained grievous head injuries. Thereafter, she was immediately shifted to K.K.Hospital and was provided first- aid treatment and then she was shifted to NIMHANS Hospital, was provided treatment and was discharged on 07.05.2015. Later, the appellant was provided treatment at different hospitals as under: (a) Ramakrishna Hospital 15.06.15 to 23.06.15 (b) Sagar Hospital 19.10.15 to 29.10.15 (c) Navachethana Hospital 30.11.15 to 08.12.15 (d) Navachetana Hospital 08.12.15 to 16.12.15 6. To prove the contents of the claim, the appellant examined herself as PW-1, other witnesses as PW-2 to PW-4 and got marked Exs.P1 to P26. The respondent did not adduce any evidence. Admittedly, the appellant was aged about 63 years at the time of accident - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21712 M.F.A. No.2309/2019 and no proof of income was produced. Hence, the income of the appellant is notionally assessed at Rs.9,000/- p.m. as per the notional income chart of the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. Insofar as the disability is concerned, Dr.Kishor Rao who has deposed before the Tribunal with regard to the disability suffered by the appellant, treatment provided to her and the difficulty faced by her, has assessed the disability to the whole body at 39%. The said assessment is based on the guidelines published in text book of Neurosurgery Wilkins and Rengachary second edition volume one chapter 437 pages 4207 to 4013 with reference to the World Health Organization, International Classification of Impairments, Disabilities and Handicaps, Geneva 1980. The evidence on record indicates that the appellant has sustained head injuries, was provided treatment at different hospitals on different occasions and all these treatments are pertaining to the injuries suffered by her in the said road accident. Considering the oral evidence of PW-4 and other medical - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21712 M.F.A. No.2309/2019 evidence on record, I am of the considered view that the Tribunal has committed a grave error in assessing the disability contrary to the evidence of PW-4. Hence, taking note of the reasons given by PW-4, the disability to the whole body is assessed at 39% for the purpose of compensation. 7. Having re-assessed the income and disability, the compensation on other heads is required to be re- assessed appropriately and accordingly, the same is re- assessed as under: HEADS AMOUNT (in Rs.) Pain and suffering 70,000 Medical expenses 20,000 Loss of income due to disability (9,000 x 12 x 7 x 39%) 2,94,840 Special diet, food, attendant charges, conveyance, etc. 25,000 Loss of income during laid up period (9000 x 4) 36,000 Loss of amenities 50,000 Total 4,95,840 - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21712 M.F.A. No.2309/2019 Thus, the appellant-claimant shall be entitled to a total compensation of Rs.4,95,840/- as against Rs.1,85,840/- awarded by the Tribunal. 7. In the result, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER a) The appeal is allowed in part. b) The impugned judgment and award dated 03.01.2019 passed by the Tribunal in M.V.C.No.1575/2016 is modified to an extent that the appellant-claimant would be entitled to total compensation of Rs.4,95,840/- as against Rs.1,85,840/- awarded by the Tribunal. c) The enhanced compensation shall carry interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realisation. d) The respondent-Insurance Company shall deposit the enhanced compensation amount with accrued interest before the Tribunal within - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21712 M.F.A. No.2309/2019 a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this judgment. e) The rest of the judgment and award of the Tribunal with respect to apportionment, deposit and release shall remain unaltered. Draw the modified award accordingly. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE RV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29