- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20290 MFA No. 5200 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 5200 OF 2024 (MV-I) BETWEEN: R GANGAIAH S/O LATE CHINNANNA BOYADU, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC NIL, R/AT NO.64, 4TH CROSS, K.R.LAYOUT, J P NAGARA, 6TH PHASE, BENGALURU - 560 078 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. MAHESHA V, ADVOCATE FOR SMT. SHARADAMBA A R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. C VENU S/O BACHAPPA CHANNAPPA, MAJOR, OCC NOT KNOWN, R/AT NO.18, 3RD CROSS, AGROMORE LAYOUT, ATTIGUPPE, VIJAYANAGAR, BENGALURU- 560 040 2. THE MANAGER, ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD NO.121, THE ESTATE BUILDING, 9TH FLOOR, DICKENSON ROAD, Digitally signed by PADMASHREE SHEKHAR DESAI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20290 MFA No. 5200 of 2024 M G ROAD, BENGALURU-560042 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S.KRISHNA KISHORE, ADVOCATE FOR R2; V/O DTD 06.01.2026, NOTICE TO R1 D/W) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 10.06.2024 PASSED IN MVC.NO.6892/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER, MACT, XVI ADDITIONAL JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION 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 the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 challenging the judgment and award dated 10.06.2024 passed in MVC No.6892/2022 on the file of the Member, MACT, XVI Additional Judge, Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru, for enhancing the compensation. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20290 MFA No. 5200 of 2024 2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for respondent No.2/Insurance Company. The ranks of the parties are retained as before the Tribunal for the sake of convenience. 3. The petitioner/injured claimant met with an accident on 27.10.2022 and filed a claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.15,00,000/- before the Tribunal. The Tribunal considering the entire evidence on record, granted an amount of Rs.5,98,750/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a., from the date of filing the petition till the date of realisation. Being aggrieved by the said order, the claimant has preferred this appeal and mainly contended that the petitioner sustained fracture injuries which are grievous in nature. He was working as a plumber and earning Rs.25,000/- per month but the Tribunal has taken his income as Rs.15,500/- per month. Though the doctor assessed the disability at 67% to both lower limbs and 34% to the whole body, the Tribunal has taken the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20290 MFA No. 5200 of 2024 disability at only 12%. It is further contended that the loss of income during the laid up period is awarded only for 2 months and that the compensation amount granted under other heads is meager. Therefore, requested for enhancement of compensation. 4. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 stated that the doctor, in his cross-examination, admitted that he is not a treated doctor and is not aware of the recent guidelines of 2018. Therefore, the Tribunal has rightly considered the disability at 12% and it is to be confirmed. 5. Though the petitioner stated that he was earning Rs.25,000/- per month, he has not filed any income proof. As he met with an accident in the year 2022, the Tribunal has rightly considered the notional income as Rs.15,500/- per month and it is confirmed. The petitioner was aged 48 years and the relevant multiplier applicable is 13. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20290 MFA No. 5200 of 2024 6. Ex.P6 is the wound certificate and Ex.P8 is the discharge summary. The Petitioner has also examined the doctor as PW-2, an Orthopaedic Surgeon. He stated that the petitioner is complaining of: a) Pain in right leg b) Pain in left knee c) Stiffness in the right ankle d) Instability in the left knee e) Difficulty in performing his normal routine work and sought treatment and also wants to assess the disability due to injuries that he had sustained in an RTA dated: 27.10.2022. The doctor further stated that the petitioner sustained following fractures: a) Fracture of both bones of the right leg. b) Fracture of the left tibial condyle. The petitioner was treated with surgery using implants in the right leg, while the left knee was treated non-surgically. On examination, the doctor found: a) The petitioner walks with a limp - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20290 MFA No. 5200 of 2024 b) Difficulty in walking fast and running c) Healed scar over the right infrapatellar area of about 3 inch, healed with secondary intentions d) Mild swelling present in the right ankle e) Tenderness over the right knee and ankle present f) Tenderness with irregular thickening of the left tibial condyle g) Instability in the left knee h) Terminal limitation of extension and flexion i) Difficulty in standing on one leg j) Difficulty in climbing stairs k) Difficulty in sitting cross-legged X-Ray left knee shows - Depression of Medial condyle X-Ray Right Leg shows - Fracture union both bones of the right leg with implants in situ. The doctor assessed the disability of both lower limbs (ie., 39% + 28%) at 67% and the whole body disability at 34% which is permanent. He further stated that the petitioner requires another surgery for removal of the implant and estimated the cost of the surgery as Rs.30,000/- to Rs.40,000/-. In the cross-examination, he admitted that he is not the treated doctor but he has gone - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20290 MFA No. 5200 of 2024 through the case sheet and admitted that as per the recent X-ray, fractures are united. He clearly admitted that he is not aware of the revised disability guidelines after 2018. He further stated that only conservative treatment was given for the left knee and after the discharge he was advised medicines. He admitted that muscle power will be improved with physiotherapy. Petitioner is not suffering from any restrictions of movements of right hip with normal hip and ankle movements and muscle power. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 stated that the doctor assessed the disability on the higher side. Therefore, this Court finds it reasonable to take the whole body disability at 18% instead of 12%. Accordingly, the loss of future earning capacity comes to Rs.15,500/- x 12 x 13 x 18% = Rs.4,35,240/-. The Tribunal has granted Rs.1,40,250/- towards medical expenses and the said amount is confirmed. The petitioner was an inpatient for a period of 3 days. Considering the nature of injuries, period of hospitalisation and other relevant factors, the Tribunal - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20290 MFA No. 5200 of 2024 has already granted Rs.50,000/- towards pain and suffering, Rs.30,000/- towards loss of amenities and the said amounts are confirmed. This Court finds it reasonable to grant Rs.30,000/- towards transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges and Rs.30,000/- towards future medical expenses. The petitioner might not have attended any other work at least for a period of 3 months. Therefore, Rs.46,500/- (Rs.15,500/- x 3) is to be granted under the head loss of income during laid up period. 7. Thus in all, compensation awarded by this Court is as below: Particulars Amount in Rs. Loss of future earning capacity 4,35,240 Medical Expenses 1,40,250 Pain and Suffering 50,000 Loss of amenities 30,000 Transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges 30,000 Loss of income during laid up period 46,500 Future Medical Expenses 30,000 Total 7,61,990 - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20290 MFA No. 5200 of 2024 8. Hence, the appellant-claimant are entitled for a total compensation of Rs.7,61,990/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. 9. In the result, the following order is passed: ORDER i. Appeal is allowed in part. ii. The judgment and award dated 10.06.2024 passed in MVC No.6892/2022 on the file of the Member, MACT, XVI Additional Judge, Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru, is modified. iii. The claimant is entitled to a sum of Rs.7,61,990/- along with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization, instead of Rs.5,98,750/- granted by the tribunal. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20290 MFA No. 5200 of 2024 iv. Respondent No.2 has already deposited the awarded amount before the Tribunal. Therefore, respondent No.2 is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs.1,63,240/- along with the interest at the rate of 6% within one month from the date of this order. v. Petitioner is permitted to withdraw the entire amount along with interest accrued on the same. Sd/- (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE SHS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 52