- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4825 MFA No. 1666 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.1666 OF 2024(MV-I) BETWEEN: ARUN R., S/O RAJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, ENGINEER AT BANGALORE AND AGRICULTURIST R/O RANGAVVANAHALLY VILLAGE, HOLALKERE TALUK - 577 526. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. R. SHASHIDHARA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MOHAN R.V., S/O R.G. VISHWANATHA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/O RANGAVVANAHALLY VILLAGE, HOLALKERE TALUK - 577 526 OWNER OF VEHICLE BEARING NO.KA-16/EJ-4225. 2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., 1ST FLOOR, A.M. ARCADE, NEAR VIDHYARTHI BHAVAN C.G. HOSPITAL ROAD DAVANAGERE - 577 001. …RESPONDENTS (V/O DATED 11.11.2024 NOTICE TO R1 IS D/W) BY SRI. JANARDHAN REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R2) Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4825 MFA No. 1666 of 2024 THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 09.11.2022 PASSED IN MVC NO.817/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MACT, HOLALKERE, 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 Heard the arguments of learned counsel for both sides. Notice to respondent No.1 is dispensed with. 2. This appeal is filed by the appellant/claimant under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, challenging the judgment and award dated 09.11.2022 passed in MVC No.817/2020, by the Court of the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Holalkere, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal' for short) seeking enhancement of compensation. 3. The injured claimant met with a road traffic accident on 26.12.2019 and filed a claim petition seeking - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4825 MFA No. 1666 of 2024 compensation of Rs.10,00,000/-. The Tribunal, after considering the oral and documentary evidence on record, awarded a total compensation of Rs.2,55,500/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization. 4. Aggrieved by the said award, the present appeal is preferred mainly contending that the Tribunal has granted meagre amounts under various heads. It is contended that the claimant was inpatient for more than three days. The doctor assessed permanent disability at 25%, but the Tribunal considered only 6.67%. It is further contended that the doctor has stated that another surgery is required for removal of the implants, the estimated cost of which is Rs.50,000/-, but the said amount has not been awarded by the Tribunal. Hence, enhancement of compensation is sought. 5. Though learned counsel for respondent No.2 submitted that the claimant stated that he was working and earning, he has not examined his employer and has - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4825 MFA No. 1666 of 2024 produced only one payslip under Ex.P.8. No bank statement has been filed. Therefore, the Tribunal rightly considered the notional income. It is further contended that the doctor assessed only functional disability at 25% and not limb disability, and hence, the Tribunal rightly considered one-third of the same as 6.67%, which does not call for interference. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the claimant was working as a Manager-Data Analytics and Continuous Development at Delhi and earning Rs.13,619/- per month. However, the claimant has produced Ex.P8, the payslip for the month of October 2021, which shows a salary of Rs.65,871/-. The claimant has not examined his employer. It was further contended that he was doing agricultural work and earning Rs.80,000/- per month, but no supporting documents or bank statements are produced. Therefore, the Tribunal has rightly considered the notional income at Rs.14,000/- per month, as the accident occurred in the year 2019, in - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4825 MFA No. 1666 of 2024 accordance with the chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority and it is confirmed. As per Ex.P6-wound certificate, the appellant/claimant was aged 30 years and the applicable multiplier is '17'. 7. As per wound certificate, the appellant sustained grievous injuries as follows: a. Abrasion over the anterior aspect of left forearm measuring 4x2 cm. b. Contusion over the middle of left forearm measuring 5x3 cm. X-ray of the left forearm shows fracture of both bones of the left forearm at the upper third. 8. The claimant examined the doctor as PW.2, who deposed that there was evidence of fracture of both the radius and ulna of the left forearm. The claimant was operated on 27.12.2019 with ORIF using plate and screws for the fracture of the radius and ORIF using TENS (Titanium Elastic Nailing System) for the fracture of the ulna. He was thereafter subjected to physiotherapy. The - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4825 MFA No. 1666 of 2024 fractures have united and the implants are in situ. Pw.2 assessed permanent disability at 25% to the left upper limb. One-third of 25% works out to 8%, however, the Tribunal has considered only 6.67%. Therefore, the disability is modified to 8%. Accordingly, the 'loss of future earning capacity' is calculated as Rs.14,000 × 12 × 17 × 8% = Rs.2,28,480/-. 9. This Court finds it reasonable to award a sum of Rs.40,000/- towards 'pain and suffering', Rs.20,000/- towards 'loss of amenities' and Rs.30,000/- towards 'transportation, extra nourishment and attending charges'. Further, as the claimant would not have attended work at least for a period of three months, a sum of Rs.42,000/- (Rs.14,000x3) is awarded towards 'loss of income during laid-up period'. 10. PW.2 deposed that the claimant requires another surgery for removal of the implants and estimated the cost of the same is Rs.50,000/-. Learned counsel of respondent No.2 objected to the said claim on the ground - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4825 MFA No. 1666 of 2024 that the claimant is availing medical reimbursement facilities, though the accident occurred in the year 2019, he has not, so far, undergone any surgery for removal of the implants, nor has he produced any medical records to substantiate the requirement of such surgery. In view of the availability of medical reimbursement facilities, the claimant is not entitled to any amount under the head of future medical expenses now. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to grant any compensation under the said head. 11. Thus, the compensation awarded by this Court is as follows: Particulars Amount in Rs. Loss of future earning capacity 2,28,480.00 Pain and suffering 40,000.00 Loss of amenities 20,000.00 Transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges 30,000.00 Loss of income during laid up period 42,000.00 Total 3,60,480.00 - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4825 MFA No. 1666 of 2024 12. In summary, the appellant/claimant is entitled to a total compensation of Rs.3,60,480.00/- as against Rs.2,55,500/- awarded by the Tribunal. The enhanced compensation works out to Rs.1,04,980/-. To this extent, the award passed by the Tribunal is modified. 13. In the result, pass the following: ORDER i. The appeal is allowed in part. ii. The judgment and award dated 09.11.2022 passed in MVC No.817/2020, by the Court of the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Holalkere, is hereby modified; iii. The appellant-claimant is entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.1,04,980/- (Rs.3,60,480/- minus Rs.2,55,500/-) with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till its realization. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4825 MFA No. 1666 of 2024 iv. Respondent No.2/Insurance Company has already deposited the awarded amount before the Tribunal. Therefore, Company is directed to deposit enhanced compensation of Rs.1,04,980/- with interest rate of 6% per annum within one month from the release of such deposit. v. Upon such deposit, the appellant/claimant is permitted to withdraw the entire amount along with interest accrued on it. Sd/- (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE TMP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 55