- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6667 MFA No. 1143 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1143 OF 2014 (MV-I) BETWEEN: AMITHANANDA SHETTY S/O SADANANDA SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, R/AT VINOD MAHAL, BEHIND CROWN RESIDENCY COURT, KARNGALPADY, MANGALORE - 575 001. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. KRISHNAMOORTHY D, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. ARUN HEGDE AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, S/O SITHARAM SHETTY, R/AT 401, KODIALBAIL MANSION, KODIALGUTTU - 575 015, MANGALORE. 2. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., VARANASHI TOWERS, MISSION STREET, BUNDER, MANGALORE - 575 001, REP/BY ITS MANAGER. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. H.C. VRUSHABENDRAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR R2; R1 - ARUN HEGDE - SERVED) Digitally signed by PADMASHREE SHEKHAR DESAI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6667 MFA No. 1143 of 2014 THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 27.06.2013 PASSED IN MVC NO.1328/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MEMBER, MACT, MANGALORE, 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 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 common judgment and award dated 27.06.2013 passed in MVC Nos.1328/2011, 1329/2011 and 1330/2011. However, MFA No.1143/2014 is filed against the award passed in MVC No.1328/2011 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, & Member, MACT, Mangalore, for enhancing the 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:6667 MFA No. 1143 of 2014 3. The petitioner/injured claimant met with an accident on 12.06.2011 and filed the claim petition before the Tribunal for compensation of Rs.5,00,000/-. The Tribunal considering the entire evidence on record granted an amount of Rs.1,10,500/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a., from the date of filing the petition till the date of realization. Being aggrieved by the said order, he preferred this appeal and mainly contended that the Tribunal granted meagre amounts under the other heads and also granted inadequate compensation. Therefore, requested for enhancement of the compensation. 4. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 stated that the claimant was working as a Service Agent in Air India Sats Company and continued in service even after the accident. As such, he is not entitled to any compensation under the head of loss of future earning capacity. It was further stated that the claimant produced his salary slip and as per the same, the Tribunal assessed his income at Rs.10,950/- per month. It was also stated that the claimant was initially hospitalized for nine days and was again admitted for plastic surgery for three days. As such, he could not attend work for a period of two months. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6667 MFA No. 1143 of 2014 But the Tribunal granted loss of income during the laid-up period only for one month. 5. Admittedly, the petitioner sustained a contusion over the lower aspect of the back of the neck and left shoulder and superficial wounds over the left side of the face just below the eye, left cheek and left chin. He took treatment at A.J. Hospital, Mangalore, as an inpatient for a total period of nine days i.e., from 12.06.2011 to 19.06.2011,then from 13.3.2012 to 15.3.2012, underwent plastic surgery. The petitioner also examined PW-4-doctor, who assessed the disability at 7.5% to the face. However, there is no evidence to show that the petitioner suffered any functional disability. Accordingly, no compensation is awarded under the head of loss of future income. Admittedly, the petitioner continued his employment even after sustaining the injuries in the accident and therefore, he is not entitled to any amount under the said head. Considering the nature of the injuries, period of hospitalisation and nature of disability sustained, this Court finds it reasonable to award a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards pain and suffering, Rs.50,000/- towards loss of amenities and Rs.40,000/- towards transportation, extra nourishment and attendant - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6667 MFA No. 1143 of 2014 charges. The Tribunal already granted Rs.81,600/- towards medical expenses and it is confirmed. The petitioner could not attend his duties for a period of two months. Therefore, he is entitled to a sum of Rs.21,900/- (Rs.10,950 × 2) towards loss of income during the treatment period. 6. Thus in all, compensation awarded by this Court is as below: 7. Hence, the appellant-claimant is entitled for a total compensation of Rs.2,93,500/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. 8. In the result, the following order is passed: Sl.Nos. Particulars Amount in Rs. 1. Towards pain and suffering 1,00,000/- 2 Towards medical expenses 81,600/- 3 Towards loss of amenities 50,000/- 4 Towards transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges 40,000/- 5 Towards loss of income during laid up period 21,900/- Total 2,93,500/- - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6667 MFA No. 1143 of 2014 ORDER i. The appeal is allowed in part. ii. The judgment and award dated 27.06.2013 passed in MVC No.1328/2011 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, & Member, MACT, Mangalore, is modified. iii. The claimant is entitled to a sum of Rs.2,93,500/- along with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization, instead of Rs.1,10,500/- granted by the tribunal. iv. Respondent No.2/Insurance Company has already deposited the award amount before the Tribunal. Therefore, respondent No.2/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs.1,83,000/- along with the interest at the rate of 6% within one month from the date of this order. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6667 MFA No. 1143 of 2014 v. On such deposit, petitioner is permitted to withdraw the entire amount along with interest accrued on the same. Sd/- (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE AMA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 56 CT: BHK