- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21631 M.F.A. No.3508/2020 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.3508/2020 (MV-I) BETWEEN: MAHESHA NOW AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS R/AT. AGASANAPURA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI, MALAVALLI TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT. &APPELLANT (BY SRI. RAGHU R, ADV., FOR SRI. PRAMOD R, ADV.,) AND: 1. THE MANAGER ZOOM CAR INIDA PRIVATE LIMITED 7TH FLOOR, TOWER B DIAMOND HAL AIRPORT ROAD BANGALORE-560008. 2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER TATA AIG INS. CO. LTD., 2ND FLOOR, A P AND BEVI JAMBU KESHAVA ARCADE, NO.69 MILLERS ROAD BANGALORE-560032. &RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S.V. HEGDE MULKHAND, ADV., FOR R2 R1 SERVICE OF NOTICE IS D/W V/C/O DTD:30.03.2023) Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21631 M.F.A. No.3508/2020 THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.19.11.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.1242/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MACT, MALAVALLI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the injured/claimant seeking enhancement of compensation being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 19.11.2019 passed in MVC.No.1242/2018 by the Senior Civil Judge & MACT, Malavalli, (for short, 8Tribunal9). 2. Though this appeal is listed for admission, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, it is taken up for final disposal. 3. Sri.Raghu R., learned counsel for Sri.Pramod R., learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Tribunal has committed an error in ignoring the oral evidence of injured-PW1, PW3 and Exs.P63, P64 and P65. He seeks - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21631 M.F.A. No.3508/2020 enhancement of compensation under the head of loss of amenities and loss of income during laid up period by allowing this appeal. 4. Per contra, Sri.S.V.Hegde Mulkhand, learned counsel for the respondent-Insurance Company defends the appeal and submits that the income is rightly assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.9,000/- per month as the appellant has failed to produce any corroborative evidence to accept the pay slips. Hence, he seeks to dismiss the appeal. 5. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing on both the sides and meticulously perused the material available on record including the Tribunal records. 6. It is to be noticed that the appellant met with an accident on 23.05.2018, he was provided treatment as inpatient in K.R.Hospital, Mysuru, from 23.05.2018 to 25.06.2018. The appellant sustained fracture of left tibia, fibula and left clavicle, and underwent surgery. PW2 - - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21631 M.F.A. No.3508/2020 Dr.Shobha H.P., assessed the disability of the appellant at 33% to the particular limb and 11% to the whole body. The Tribunal has rightly assessed the disability at 11% which does not call for any interference. In order to prove the income, the appellant claimed that he was working as an Electrician at Oasis Hotel, Mysuru, and produced salary slips at Exs.P63 and P64, he has also produced the service certificate at Ex.P65 and he has examined one N.S.Kumar as PW3, who is H.R.Manager of the Hotel, who has deposed that the injured was working with the Hotel and drawing salary of Rs.12,805/-. In my considered view the Tribunal has committed grave error in disbelieving the said evidence without any justifiable reasons. Hence, the income of the appellant-injured is assessed at Rs.12,805/- per month for the purpose of determination of compensation. The appellant was aged about 26 years as on the date of accident, the appropriate multiplier would be 17, which has been rightly considered by the Tribunal. The appellant was inpatient for more than 1 month and - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21631 M.F.A. No.3508/2020 underwent surgery. Considering the same the compensation under the head of loss of future income due to disability, loss of income during the laid up period and loss of amenities is required to be reassessed appropriately. 7. Hence, the appellant is entitled to compensation under the head of loss of future income due to disability as under: Rs.12,805 X 12 X 17 X 11% = Rs.2,87,344/-. 8. Further, the appellant would be entitled to compensation of Rs.51,220/- (Rs.12,805 X 4) towards the loss of income during laid-up period and Rs.40,000/- towards loss of amenities. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal under other heads is unaltered. 9. Thus, the appellant would be entitled to modified compensation as under: - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21631 M.F.A. No.3508/2020 Thus, the appellant-claimant shall be entitled to a total compensation of Rs.5,36,901/- as against Rs.4,26,300/- awarded by the Tribunal. 10. In the result, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER a) Appeal is allowed in part. b) The impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal is modified to an extent that the appellant-claimant would be entitled to a total compensation of Rs.5,36,901/- as against Rs.4,26,300/- awarded by the Tribunal. HEADS AMOUNT (in Rs.) Pain & sufferings 50,000 Attendant charges, food, nutrition and conveyance expenses 45,000 Loss of future income due to disability 2,87,344 Loss of income during laid up period 51,220 Medical expenses 28,337 Loss of amenities 40,000 Future prospectus 35,000 Total 5,36,901 - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21631 M.F.A. No.3508/2020 c) The enhanced compensation amount shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of payment. d) The Insurance Company shall deposit the enhanced compensation amount with accrued interest before the Tribunal within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment. e) The entire enhanced compensation amount shall be released in favour of the appellant-claimant. f) Registry shall transmit the records to the Tribunal forthwith. g) Draw modified award accordingly. 11. Sri.S.V.Hegde Mulkhand, learned counsel for the respondent-Insurance Company is permitted to file vakalath in three weeks. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE BSR List No.: 2 Sl No.: 13