- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13098 MFA No. 7151 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 7151 OF 2019 (MV-I) BETWEEN: 1. SRI RANGASWAMY @ RANGAPPA S/O LATE KEMPEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/AT NO.13/3, GOODEHOSALLI, KIKKERI HOBLI, K R PETE TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT. AND ALSO AT: C/O. VIJAYALAXMI WINES, B M ROAD, CHANNARAYAPATNA TOWN. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SHRIPAD V. SHASTRI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI MAHESH S/O. NANJUNDEGOWDA, MAJOR, R/O. NAYAKANAHALLI, SANTHEBACHALLI HOBLI, K R PETE TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT. Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13098 MFA No. 7151 of 2019 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER NATIONAL INSURANCE CO., LTD., DO X, HERO MOTO CORP VERTICAL, 101-106, BMC HOUSE, CONNAUGHAT PALACE, NEW DELHI-110001. R/BY THE BRANCH MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE CO., LTD., MANJUNATHA COMPLEX, OLD BUS STAND ROAD, HASSAN. …RESPONDENTS (NOTICE TO R1 D/W V/O DATED 04.03.2026 BY SRI. H.C. VRUSHABHENDRAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 13.03.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.1021/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, CHANNARAYAPATNA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION BARRED BY TIME. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13098 MFA No. 7151 of 2019 ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the injured claimant seeking for higher compensation challenging the judgment and award dated 13.03.2018 passed in M.V.C.No.1021/2015 by the Senior Civil Judge and M.A.C.T., Channarayapatna (for short, ‘Tribunal’). 2. Though this appeal is listed for orders, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, it is taken up for final disposal. 3. Sri. Shripad V. Shastri, learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the Tribunal has failed to appreciate the oral and documentary evidence and awarded global compensation of Rs.75,000/- to the serious injuries suffered by the claimant in a road accident. It is submitted that in order to prove the case of the claimant, he has examined himself as PW.1 and also examined doctor as PW.2, who has clearly deposed before the Tribunal that the claimant was hospitalized for more - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13098 MFA No. 7151 of 2019 than 15 days, underwent surgery and suffered 3 fractures. PW.2 has opined that the disability sustained by the appellant/claimant is more than 33.75% to the particular limb. Hence, he submits that considering the nature of disability suffered and treatment provided to the claimant, the compensation is required to be re-assessed by considering the settled position of law. Hence, he seeks to allow the appeal. 4. Per contra, Sri.H.C.Vrushabendraiah, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 - Insurance Company supports the impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal and submits that the appellant/claimant has failed to produce the disability certificate. It is submitted that the oral testimony of PW.2 makes it very clear that the fractures suffered by the claimant has been completely united and there is no disability. Despite the same, he has orally spoken before the Tribunal that the appellant has a disability to the extent of 33.75% which has no basis at all. It is further submitted that the Tribunal considering - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13098 MFA No. 7151 of 2019 the nature of the injuries suffered and treatment provided, by well reasoned judgment, awarded global compensation of Rs.75,000/- which does not call for any interference in this appeal. Hence, he seeks to dismiss the appeal. 5. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing on both sides and meticulously perused the material available on record. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions advanced. 6. The material on record indicates that on 20.04.2015 at about 09.00 a.m. when the claimant was proceeding for work, he met with a road accident and sustained injuries. Initially, he was provided treatment at Government Hospital, Channarayapatna. Thereafter, he was shifted to Punya Hospital, Channarayapatna. The claimant has filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking for compensation. In order to prove the claim, the claimant examined himself as PW.1 and examined PW.2 - Dr. Mahesh and got marked - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13098 MFA No. 7151 of 2019 Exhibits-P1 to P12. The respondent did not adduce any evidence before the Tribunal. The Tribunal considering the evidence on record, awarded global compensation of Rs.75,000/- along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of petition till the realisation of the amount from respondent No.2. 7. It is to be noticed that the parties to the proceeding do not dispute that the appellant/claimant sustained injuries in a road accident dated 20.04.2015. It is also not in dispute that the Insurance Company is liable to pay the compensation. The records indicate that the appellant was provided initial treatment at Government Hospital, Channarayapatna and thereafter at Punya Hospital, Channarayapatna for further treatment. The Tribunal has clearly recorded the finding that the appellant was inpatient for a period of 15 days and suffered bimalleolar fracture left ankle, fracture left acetabulam and fracture L3 vertibra which are grievous injuries. The records further indicate that the reasoning in paragraph 20 - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13098 MFA No. 7151 of 2019 of the Tribunal clearly indicates that after conducting a surgery, K-wire was fixed and fracture was also united and no plate and screws were fixed. Taking note of the nature of injuries suffered and treatment provided to the claimant, I am of the considered view that PW.2 was not justified in assessing the disability at 33.75%. However, this Court also cannot ignore the fact that the claimant has placed sufficient material before the Tribunal to come to a conclusion that the claimant has undergone a surgery and suffered three fractures referred supra. Taking note of the aforesaid fractures, I am of the view that the interest of justice would be met, if the disability for the purpose of compensation is assessed at 11%. It is not in dispute that the claimant has not produced any cogent and acceptable evidence before the Tribunal with regard to the income. Hence, his income is notionally assessed at Rs.9,000/- per month placing reliance on the notional income chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. The claimant was aged about 45 years. Hence, the - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13098 MFA No. 7151 of 2019 appropriate multiplier would be '14'. Hence, the appellant is entitled to compensation under the head of 'loss of future income due to disability' as under: Rs.9,000 X 12 X 14 X11% = Rs.1,66,320/-. 8. Having assessed the income, disability, taking note of the fact that the appellant/injured was inpatient for more than 15 days and he was also advised to take follow- up treatment, I am of the view that interest of justice would be met, if the appellant is awarded the following compensation: HEADS AMOUNT (in Rs.) Loss of future income due to disability 1,66,320/- Pain & suffering 50,000/- Loss of amenities in life 30,000/- Food, nourishment, transportation and attendant charges 10,000/- Loss of income during laid up period (Rs.9,000 x 3 months) 27,000/- Total 2,83,320/- - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13098 MFA No. 7151 of 2019 9. Thus, the appellant-claimant shall be entitled to total compensation of Rs.2,83,320/- as against Rs.75,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. 10. In the result, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER i) Appeal is allowed in part. ii) The impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal is modified to an extent that the appellant-claimant would be entitled to total compensation of Rs.2,83,320/- as against Rs.75,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. iii) The enhanced compensation amount shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of payment. iv) The appellant-claimant is not entitled to interest for the delayed period of 419 days in filing the appeal. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13098 MFA No. 7151 of 2019 iv) The Insurance Company shall deposit the enhanced compensation amount with accrued interest before the Tribunal within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment. v) The entire compensation amount shall be released in favour of the appellant-claimant. vi) Draw modified award accordingly. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE KA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7