- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1969 MFA No. 6708 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 6708/2025 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SRI SHABBIR KHAN S/O. MUSTHAQ KHAN, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/AT RANGANATHAPURA, NAGAVALLI POST, HEBBUR, TUMKUR TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT-572 120. &APPELLANT (BY SRI. VIJAY KUMAR T.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI AZAM PASHA S/O. SHAIK ISMAIL, AGED MAJOR, R/AT RANGANATHAPURA, NAGAVALLI POST, HEBBUR, TUMKUR TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT-572 120. 2. THE MANAGER, THE CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., UNIT NO.4, 9TH FLOOR, LEVEL-06, GOLDEN HEIGHTS COMPLEX, 59TH 'C' CROSS, INDUSTRIAL SUBURB, RAJAJINAGARA 4TH M BLOCK, BENGALURU-560 010. &RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B. PRADEEP, ADVOCATE FOR R2, Digitally signed by PADMASHREE SHEKHAR DESAI Location: High Court Of Karnatka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1969 MFA No. 6708 of 2025 V/O DATED 12.09.2025 NOTICE TO R1 IS D/W) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 12.12.2024 PASSED IN MVC NO.2181/2023 ON THE FILE OF THE XXI ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND ACJM, MEMBR, MACT, BENGALURU (SCCH-23), 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 judgment and award dated 12.12.2024 passed in MVC No.2181/2023 by the XXI Addl. SCJ & ACMJ, Member, MACT, Bengaluru, for enhancing the compensation. 2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for respondent No.2. The ranks of the parties are retained as per tribunal for the sake of convenience. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1969 MFA No. 6708 of 2025 3. The injured claimant aged 28 years met with an accident on 26.03.2023 and filed claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.15 lakhs. The Tribunal considering the entire evidence on record granted an amount of Rs.5,29,900/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a., from date of petition till deposit. 4. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner preferred this appeal and mainly contended that he sustained grievous injuries. The doctor assessed the disability as 31% to the right lower limb and 15.5% disability to the whole body. But the Tribunal erred in taking the same as 8% and the amount granted on the other heads are meager. Therefore, requested for enhancement of the compensation. Learned counsel for the respondent No.2 stated that the Tribunal rightly considered all the aspects and granted reasonable amount and it needs no interference. 5. Though petitioner stated that he was working as a driver and was earning Rs.30,000/- per month, he has not - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1969 MFA No. 6708 of 2025 filed any income proof. As he met with an accident in the year 2023, Tribunal has rightly considered Rs.16,000/- as notional income as per the chart prepared by Karnataka State Legal Services Authority and it needs no interference. He was aged 28 years and the multiplier taken is 8179. The petitioner sustained the following injuries, 1) Lacerated injury on chin, 2) Tenderness of right leg and 3) Fracture of upper 1/3rd of shaft of femur, as per the wound certificate and wound Nos.1 and 2 are simple in nature and 3rd injury is grievous in nature. He was hospitalized for a period of 8 days as per the discharge summary. He examined doctor as PW2 and he stated that the petitioner sustained 31% to the right lower limb, 15.5% disability to the whole body. He further stated that the fracture is united and implants are in situ. He also admitted that there are no fractures in hip. Therefore, the Tribunal has taken the functional disability as 8%. Considering the medical evidence, this Court finds it reasonable to take the disability as 10% instead of 8%. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1969 MFA No. 6708 of 2025 The loss of future earning capacity comes to Rs.16,000 x 12 x 17 x 10% = Rs.3,26,400/-. The Tribunal granted Rs.92,700/- towards medical expenses, as per Ex.P15 and it is confirmed. Hence, the entire amount granted under the other heads is confirmed. This Court finds it reasonable to grant an amount of Rs.30,000/- towards transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges. The amount granted under the other heads needs no interference and it is confirmed. 6. Thus in all, components awarded by this court are as below, Sl.Nos. Particulars Amount in Rs. 1. Towards loss of future income 3,26,400 2. Towards pain and suffering 50,000 3. Towards loss of income during laid-up period 64,000 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1969 MFA No. 6708 of 2025 Hence, the compensation granted by tribunal is enhanced from Rs.5,29,900/- to Rs.6,13,100/- 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 12.12.2024 passed in MVC No.2181/2023 on the file of the XXI Addl. SCJ & ACMJ, is modified. iii. The claimant is entitled to a sum of Rs.6,13,100/- along with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date 4. Medical expenses 92,700 5. Loss of future amenities and happiness 50,000 6. Towards transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges 30,000 Total 6,13,100 - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1969 MFA No. 6708 of 2025 of realization, instead of Rs.5,29,900/- granted by the Tribunal. iv. Respondent No.2/Insurance Company has already deposited the awarded amount before the tribunal. Therefore, respondent No.2/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs.83,200/- 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. vi. On 05.01.2026, the delay of 157 days is condoned by this Court on the condition that the claimant will not be entitled for the interest in case of enhancement. Hence, Insurance Company is not liable to pay the interest for the delayed period. Sd/- (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE AKV CT:NR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 69