- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3866 MFA No. 2246 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 2245 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.2246 OF 2015(MV-I) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.2245 OF 2015(MV-I) IN MFA No. 2246/2015 BETWEEN: SMT ROOPA P MITTADAR W/O PRITAM B MITTADAR AGED 34 YEARS R/AT NO.306, VAIBHAVA 5TH MAIN ROAD 2ND CROSS, 5TH STAGE, UTTARAHALLI-KENGERI MAIN ROAD BANGALORE 560 061 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. CHIDANANDA P, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMTED “SUNDARAM TOWERS”, 45 & 46 WHITES ROAD CHENNAI -600 002 2. SRI H MAHADEV S/O LATE HANUMANTHE GOWDA MARUTHI KRUPA HANUMANTHAPURA EXTN. KORATAGERE TALUK TUMKUR, KARNATAKA-572 101 Digitally signed by PADMASHREE SHEKHAR DESAI Location: High Court Of Karnatka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3866 MFA No. 2246 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 2245 of 2015 3. SRI SANGAPPA KUMAR S/O BASAPPA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS RA/T KAREKALLAHALLI VILLAGE GOWRIBIDANUR TALUK CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-561 207 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI ARUN PONNAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR R1 –ABSENT; VIDE ORDER DATED 14.07.2021, NOTICE AGAINST R2 AND R3 DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 27.12.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.2988/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE 12TH ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE, MEMBER, MACT, BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. IN MFA NO. 2245/2015 BETWEEN: MASTER ANEESH P MITTADAR S/O PRITAM MITTADAR AGED: 9 YEARS, R/AT NO.306, VAIBHAVA, 5TH MAIN ROAD, 2ND CROSS, 5TH STAGE UTTARAHALLI-KENGERI MAIN ROAD, BANGALORE-560 061. SINCE MINOR REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER SMT. ROOPA MITTADAR ...APPELLANT (BY SRI. CHIDANANDA P, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3866 MFA No. 2246 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 2245 of 2015 “SUNDARAM TOWERS" 45 & 46, WHITES ROAD, CHENNAI-600 002. 2. SRI. H. MAHADEV S/O LATE HANUMANTHE GOWDA MARUTHI KRUPA, HANUMANTHAPURA EXTN. KORATAGERE TALUK, TUMKUR, KARNATAKA-572 101. 3. SRI. SANGAPPA KUMAR S/O BASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/AT KAREKALLAHALLI VILLAGE, GOWRIBIDANUR TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-561 207. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI ARUN PONNAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR R1 –ABSENT; VIDE ORDER DATED 14.07.2021, NOTICE AGAINST R2 AND R3 DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 5.1.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.2989/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE 12TH ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE, MEMBER, MACT, BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3866 MFA No. 2246 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 2245 of 2015 ORAL JUDGMENT IN MFA No. 2246/2015 This appeal is filed by the appellant/claimant under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 challenging the judgment and award dated 27.12.2014 passed in MVC No.2988/2013 on the file of the XII Additional Small Causes Judge, Member, MACT, Bengaluru, for enhancing the compensation. 2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant. Learned counsel for respondent remained absent previous day and also today. Therefore, matter is taken up for final disposal. The ranks of the parties are retained as per tribunal for the sake of convenience. 3. The injured claimant met with an accident on 20.01.2013 and filed claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.15,00,000/-. The Tribunal considered the entire evidence on record and granted an amount of - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3866 MFA No. 2246 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 2245 of 2015 Rs.1,37,283/- along with the interest at the rate of 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realisation. 4. Aggrieved by the said award, she preferred an appeal and mainly contended that she spent Rs.2,00,000/- towards medical expenses. She was inpatient from 21.01.2013 to 25.01.2013. The Tribunal granted inadequate compensation. Though she was earning Rs.30,000/- per month, the amount granted under the other heads is meager. The doctor assessed her disability as 12.66%, but the tribunal has taken it as only 8% and thus requested for enhancement of the compensation. 5. The Petitioner was a housewife and she has not filed any income proof. As she met with an accident in the year 2013, this Court finds it reasonable to take her notional income as Rs.8,000/- per month as per the chart prepared by Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. She was aged 36 years and the multiplier taken is 15. Ex.P4/wound certificate issued by the B.G.S. Global - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3866 MFA No. 2246 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 2245 of 2015 hospital, in which it is clear that the petitioner has sustained the following injuries; 1)Undisplaced fracture of right ulna 2)Blunt injury on chest which are grievous in nature. The Petitioner also examined doctor as PW2 and he stated that she sustained displaced middle, third, right ulna and blunt injury on the chest and assessed the disability as 33% to the upper limb and 12.66% to the whole body, 1/3rd of 33% comes to 11%. The Tribunal observed that she has not undergone any surgery at the time of discharge. Her condition was stable and she is using her right hand and thus taken her disability as 8% instead of 12.66%. This Court finds it reasonable to take 1/3rd of 33% i.e., 11%., instead of 8%. The loss of future earning capacity comes to Rs.8,000 X 12 X 15 X 11% = Rs.1,58,400/-. The Petitioner was hospitalized for a period of 6 days. Considering her nature of injuries, period of hospitalization, this Court finds it - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3866 MFA No. 2246 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 2245 of 2015 reasonable to enhance the pain and suffering to Rs.50,000/-. Loss of amenities to Rs.25,000/- . She might not have attended any other work at least for a period of 3 months, therefore, she is entitled for Rs.24,000/- under the head loss of income during laid- up. She is also entitled for Rs.30,000/- under the head transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges. The Tribunal granted Rs.5,283/- towards medical expenses and it is confirmed. 6. Thus in all, components awarded by this court are as below, Sl.Nos. Particulars Amount in Rs. 1 Loss of future income 1,58,400 2 Pain and suffering 50,000 3 Loss of amenities 25,000 4 Transportation, extra nourishment and attendant 30,000 - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3866 MFA No. 2246 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 2245 of 2015 Hence, the compensation granted by tribunal is enhanced from Rs.1,37,283/- to Rs.2,92,683/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. 7. In the result, the following order is passed: ORDER i. Appeal is allowed in part. ii. The judgment and award dated 27.12.2014 passed in 27.12.2014 passed in MVC No.2988/2013 on the file of the XII Additional Small Causes Judge, Member, MACT, Bengaluru, is modified. iii. The claimants are entitled to a sum of Rs. 2,92,683/- along with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date 5 Loss of income during laid down period 24,000 6 Medical expenses 5,283 Total 2,92,683 - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3866 MFA No. 2246 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 2245 of 2015 of realization, instead of Rs.1,37,283/- granted by the tribunal. iv. Respondent No.1/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs.1,55,400/- along with the interest at the rate of 6% within one month from the date of this order. v. On such deposit, petitioner is permitted to withdraw the entire amount along with interest accrued on the same. IN MFA NO. 2245/2015 This appeal is filed by the appellant/claimant under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 challenging the judgment and award dated 05.01.2015 by XII Additional Small Causes Judge, Member, MACT, Bengaluru, for enhancing the compensation. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3866 MFA No. 2246 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 2245 of 2015 8. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant. Learned counsel for respondent remained absent previous date and also today. As matter pertains to the year 2013, this court finds it reasonable to proceed with the passing of order. 9. The injured claimant aged 9 years met with an accident on 20.01.2013 and his mother filed claim petition and represented him as a natural guardian, claiming compensation of Rs.15,00,000. The Tribunal considering the evidence on record, granted an amount of Rs.Rs.1,60,000/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realisation. 10. Aggrieved by the said order, this appeal is preferred and mainly contended that the doctor assessed the disability as 11.8%, but the tribunal has taken it as 9%. The permanent disability of the lower limb is 35.4%. The amount granted under other heads are meager. Therefore, requested for enhancement of the - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3866 MFA No. 2246 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 2245 of 2015 compensation. The Petitioner sustained the following injuries. 1) Traumatic brain injury. 2) Left hip posterior dislocation. The injuries sustained are grievous in nature. He underwent emergency close reduction hip and hip dislocation by orthopedic surgical team. The doctor assessed the disability and held that the petitioner has pain in the left hip, lower back and thigh extending to knee associated with limp as the petitioner facing difficulty while sitting on the floor, squatting and while climbing the stairs, standing on both legs and assessed the disability as 35.4% of the lower limb and that of the total body disability as 11.8%.. 11. As per Master Mallikarjun v. Divisional Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd. Reported in 2013 SCJ 2445, as the whole body disability is 11.8%, petitioner is entitled for compensation of Rs.3,00,000/-. - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3866 MFA No. 2246 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 2245 of 2015 Tribunal erroneously considered the disability as 9% and granted Rs.1,00,000/- and the same requires to be set aside. He was hospitalized for a period of 6 days. PW2 suggested that he requires total hip replacement for AVN of left head of left femur and its estimated cost is Rs. 3.2 lakhs. Further, PW2 in the cross examination stated that there is no compulsion for replacement of the AVN of left head of the left femur. As such, no amount was granted towards future medical expenses. Considering the nature of injuries sustained by the petitioner, this Court finds it reasonable to grant an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- for pain and suffering, Rs.50,000/- for loss of amenities and Rs.50,000/- for transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges. His mother might have taken care of him at least for a period of 3 months, as he sustained grievous injuries in the accident. Therefore, as accident occurred in the year 2013, if her notional income is taken as Rs.8,000/-. She is entitled for Rs.24,000/- under the head loss of income during laid up period for parents. - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3866 MFA No. 2246 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 2245 of 2015 12. Thus in all, components awarded by this court are as below, Hence, the compensation granted by tribunal is enhanced from Rs.1,60,000/- to Rs.5,24,000/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. 13. In the result, the following order is passed: ORDER i. Appeal is allowed in part. ii. The judgment and award dated 5.1.2015 passed in MVC No.2989/2013 on the file of Sl.Nos. Particulars Amount in Rs. 1 Loss of future earning 3,00,000 2 Pain and suffering 1,00,000 3 Loss of amenities 50,000 4 transportation, extra nourishment and attendant 50,000 5 Loss of income during laid down period 24,000 Total 5,24,000 - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3866 MFA No. 2246 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 2245 of 2015 the XII Additional Small Causes Judge, Member, MACT, Bengaluru, is modified. iii. The claimants are entitled to a sum of Rs. 5,24,000/- along with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization, instead of Rs. 1,60,000/- granted by the tribunal. iv. Respondent No.1/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs.3,64,000/- along with the interest at the rate of 6% within one month from the date of this order. v. It is stated that minor petitioner already attained the age of majority and now he is aged 21 years therefore he is permitted to withdraw the entire amount along with the interest accrued on the same. Sd/- (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE AKV CT:NR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 63