- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6812 MFA No. 4486 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.4486 OF 2021(MV-I) BETWEEN: SRI PADMANABHAIAH C. R., S/O RANGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, RESIDENCE OF TURUVEKERE TALUK, DABBAGHATTA HOBLI, CHANDAPURA, THANDAGA, TURUVEKERE, TUMKURU - 572 224. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. RAJASHEKAR K.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI NANJAPPA K., S/O KEMPEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT MAJOR, R/O TURUVEKERE KHORI, MANVINAHALLI, TURUVEKERE TALUK, TUMKURU DISTRICT - 572224. Digitally signed by AASEEFA PARVEEN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6812 MFA No. 4486 of 2021 2. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., 5TH FLOOR AND 6TH FLOOR KRISHI BHAVAN , NRUPATUNGA ROAD BANGALORE - 560001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.S. KRISHNA, ADVOCATE FOR R2; R1- SERVICE OF NOTICE, DISPENSED WITH, V/O. DATED 19.12.2025) THIS MFA FILED U/S. 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 07.03.2020 PASSED IN MVC NO. 5809/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER, MACT, XVIII ADDITIONAL JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, M.A.C.T., BENGALURU CITY (SCCH-4), 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 DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6812 MFA No. 4486 of 2021 ORAL JUDGMENT Heard Sri.Rajashekar K., learned counsel for the appellant as well as Sri.B.S.Krishna, learned counsel for respondent No.2. 2. Challenge in this appeal is the award that is passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru, In MVC No.5809/2019 dated 07.03.2020. This is the claimant's appeal. 3. The appellant projecting that he sustained grievous injuries in a road traffic accident that occurred in the year 2019 filed a petition claiming compensation of ₹20,00,000/- in total. The tribunal gave a finding that he is entitled to a sum of ₹3,51,000/- as compensation. 4. Arguing the matter, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the tribunal awarded meager sum as compensation. The appellant as an agriculturist was earning ₹20,000/- per month by the date of accident, however, tribunal took the national income of the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6812 MFA No. 4486 of 2021 appellant as ₹10,000/- per month only, which is unjustifiable. Learned counsel submits that the accident occurred in the year 2019 and for the relevant period Karnataka State Legal Services Authority is taking the notional income as ₹14,000/- per month for settlement of claims and at least said figure should have been considered by the tribunal. Learned counsel also states that though PW2 stated that the disability in respect of whole body is 12%, the tribunal took the disability as 10% in respect of whole body which is not fair. Learned counsel further contends that the tribunal has not awarded the required sum and therefore allowing the appeal the amount sought for may be granted. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.2 submits that by the evidence of PW2 itself it is clear that the fracture is united and thus the appellant does not suffer with any disability as he contended. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6812 MFA No. 4486 of 2021 Learned counsel also states that the compensation granted by the tribunal is justifiable. 6. There is no denial of the fact that the appellant sustained fracture of left femur. Equally there is no denial of the fact that the appellant underwent surgery during the course of treatment. Considering the evidence of PW2 and other material produced, the tribunal took the disability in respect of whole body as 10%, which requires no interference. 7. So far as occupation and earnings of the appellant are concerned, appellant failed to produce any proof that he holds agricultural land and he is an agriculturalist by profession. He also failed to establish that he was earning ₹20,000/- per month. But considering the submission that is made by learned counsel for the appellant, this Court is of the view that the notional income of the appellant is required to be taken as ₹14,000/- per month. Thus, taking the notional - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6812 MFA No. 4486 of 2021 income as ₹14,000/- and without disturbing the other parameters i.e. application of appropriate multiplier '5' and disability in respect of whole body as 10%, the compensation which the appellant is entitled to receive towards loss of future earnings comes to ₹84,000/- (₹14,000/-x12x5x10%). The tribunal granted a sum of ₹60,000/- only towards loss of future earnings. Thus, appellant is entitled to an additional sum of ₹24,000/- (₹84,000/- minus ₹60,000/-) towards loss of future earnings. 8. Exhibiting an opinion that appellant might have lost his earnings for four months, the tribunal granted a sum of ₹40,000/- towards loss of income during laid up period. However, taking the notional income as ₹14,000/-, the compensation which the appellant is entitled to receive towards loss of income during laid up period comes to ₹56,000/- (14,000 x 4). Thus, the additional sum which the appellant is entitled - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6812 MFA No. 4486 of 2021 to receive towards loss of income during laid up period is ₹16,000/- (₹56,000/- minus ₹40,000/-). 9. The tribunal failed to award any compensation for the expenditure which the appellant would have incurred for transportation during the period of treatment. This Court is of the view that appellant is entitled to a sum of ₹10,000/- towards transportation charges. The compensation granted by the tribunal under all other heads is justifiable. Therefore, the sum which the appellant is entitled to receive apart from the sum that is awarded as compensation by the tribunal is ₹50,000/- (₹24,000/- + ₹16,000/- + ₹10,000/-). 10. Hence, the appeal is disposed of with the following ORDER i. Appeal is allowed in part. ii. The compensation that is granted by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangaluru through orders - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6812 MFA No. 4486 of 2021 in MVC No.5809/2019 dated 07.03.2020 is enhanced by ₹50,000/- iii. The enhanced sum shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit. iv. Respondent No.2 is directed to deposit the enhanced sum within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment. v. On such deposit, appellant is permitted to withdraw the entire amount. Sd/- (DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE AP CT:TSM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20