- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14400 M.F.A. No.2262/2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.2262/2019 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SMT. SADHANA KUMARI W/O ROHAN KANUNGA AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS R/AT NO.13/125 OLD MEDAR ROAD, HOSPET BELLARY-583201 (PERMANENT ADDRESS) NO.30, FLAT NO.T1, RAMA SOURABHA 9TH CROSS, 5TH MAIN, N.R.COLONY BENGALURU-560196. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. GURUDEV PRASAD K.T. ADV.,) AND: 1. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD REP BY ITS MANAGER TP HUB, 5TH AND 6TH FLOOR KRISHI BHAVAN, HUDSON CIRCLE BENGALURU-560 002. 2. MR. MURUGAN K V S/O KRISHNAPPA B C R/AT NO.111, 9TH MAIN 5TH CROSS, SRINIVASANAGAR BENGALURU-560050. Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14400 M.F.A. No.2262/2019 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD REP BY MANAGER TP HUB, 5TH AND 6TH FLOOR KRISHI BHAVAN, HUDSON CIRCLE BENGALURU-560 002. 4. MR. UMESH D/O MARIYAPPA R/AT NO.185-1, ARETHIPPURRU MADDUR TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. JWALAKUMAR, ADV., FOR R1 SRI. S. SRISHAILA, ADV., FOR R3 R2 IS SERVED & UNREPRESENTED NOTICE TO R4 IS D/W V/O/DTD:29.05.2024) - - - THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:31.10.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.2126/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE XXI ADDITIONAL SCJ & XIX ACMM, MEMBER, 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: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14400 M.F.A. No.2262/2019 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the injured-claimant challenging the judgment and award dated 31.10.2018 passed in M.V.C.No.2126/2017 by the XXI Additional Small Causes Court and the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at Bengaluru (SCCH-23) (for short 'Tribunal'). 2. Though this appeal is listed for admission, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, it is taken up for final disposal. 3. Sri.K.T.Gurudev Prasad, learned counsel appearing for the appellant-claimant submits that the Tribunal has committed a grave error in assessing the income of the claimant at Rs.9,000/- per month by ignoring her qualification and vocation as she is a B.E. graduate and working as a Quality Engineer. It is submitted that the Doctor has assessed the disability of the claimant at 40% to the right lower limb, hence, her - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14400 M.F.A. No.2262/2019 disability to the whole body is required to be considered at 20%. It is further submitted that no compensation has been awarded towards loss of income during the laid up period. It is also submitted that the award of compensation on all the other heads is on the lower side. Hence, he seeks to allow the appeal. 4. Per contra, Sri.Jwalakumar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.1-insurer of the offending vehicle and Sri.S.Srishaila, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.3-insurer of the another vehicle, jointly submit that the Tribunal, taking into account the fact that the claimant has failed to produce the proof of her income, has rightly assessed her income notionally at Rs.9,000/- per month and also taking into account the nature of fractures suffered by the claimant, has rightly assessed the disability at 10%. It is submitted that the Tribunal has recorded the reason that PW-3 is not the Doctor who treated the claimant. It is further submitted that the compensation awarded on all the other heads is just and - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14400 M.F.A. No.2262/2019 proper and does not call for any modification in this appeal. Hence, they seek to dismiss the appeal. 5. I have heard the arguments of learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsels for the respondents and meticulously perused the material available on record including the records of the Tribunal. 6. The only point that would arise for consideration in this appeal is: "Whether the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal calls for any interference?" 7. The claimant met with a road traffic accident on 30.03.2017 and sustained comminuted fracture lower end of the tibia and fracture lower end of the fibula right side. She underwent surgery by means of ORIF for the fracture of tibia with IMIL nailing on 30.03.2017. She was treated as an inpatient in the hospital for a period of 4 days. In order to prove her income and disability, she has - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14400 M.F.A. No.2262/2019 examined herself as PW-1 and another two witnesses as PW-2 and PW-3. She got marked documents at Exs.P1 to P21. The respondents adduced evidence of RW-1 and RW- 2. They got marked Exs.R1 to R8. The Tribunal, after assessing the evidence, awarded the total compensation of Rs.3,15,974/- along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum. The claimant has averred that she is a B.E. graduate, working as a Quality Engineer in Mindware Technologies, Southend Road, and drawing a monthly salary of Rs.12,000/- per month. However, she has failed to produce any acceptable evidence before the Tribunal with regard to her income. In the absence of any such evidence, it would be appropriate to assess the income of the claimant at Rs.11,000/- per month, placing reliance on the chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. The Tribunal, considering the oral testimony of PW-3, other medical records and the fact that PW-3 has assessed the disability at 40% to the right lower limb and 20% to the whole body, has recorded the finding that it - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14400 M.F.A. No.2262/2019 would be appropriate to assess the disability at 20% to the whole body. However, while calculating the compensation, the Tribunal has taken the disability at 10%. In my considered view, taking note of the nature of injuries suffered by the claimant, it would be appropriate to assess the disability at 13%. Having re-assessed the disability and income, it would be appropriate to assess the compensation as follows: HEADS AMOUNT (in Rs.) Pain and suffering 40,000 Loss of future income due to disability (11,000 x 12 x 17 x 13%) 2,91,720 Medical bills 12,374 Loss of income during laid up period (11,000 x 2 months) 22,000 Loss of amenities 30,000 Conveyance, food, nourishment and attendant charges 20,000 Future medical expenses 10,000 Total 4,26,094 Thus, the appellant-claimant shall be entitled to a total compensation of Rs.4,26,094/- as against Rs.3,15,974/- awarded by the Tribunal. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14400 M.F.A. No.2262/2019 8. In the result, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER a) The appeal is allowed-in-part. b) The impugned judgment and award dated 31.10.2018 passed by the Tribunal in M.V.C.No.2126/2017, is modified to an extent that the appellant-claimant would be entitled to the total compensation of Rs.4,26,094/- as against Rs.3,15,974/- awarded by the Tribunal. c) The enhanced compensation shall carry interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realisation. d) The respondent No.1 shall deposit the enhanced compensation amount with accrued interest before the Tribunal within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this judgment. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14400 M.F.A. No.2262/2019 e) The rest of the judgment and award of the Tribunal with respect to apportionment, deposit and release shall remain unaltered. f) Registry shall transmit the records to the Tribunal forthwith. g) Draw the modified award accordingly. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE RV List No.: 2 Sl No.: 10