Karnataka High Court
Iranna vs Ramesh on 5 November, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6578
MFA No. 204192 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO. 204192 OF 2025 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
IRANNA
S/O. GURAGONDAPPA CHIKKOND,
AGE 66 YEARS, OCC. CLEANER,
R/O. GANGADHAR PLOTS, B. BAGEWADI,
DIST. VIJAYAPURA-586101.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI SANGANAGOUDA V BIRADAR,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. RAMESH
S/O. IRANNA CHIKKOND,
AGE 31 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS,
Digitally signed R/O. NANDI BADAVANE, B.BAGEWADI,
by SUMITRA DIST. VIJAYAPURA-586101.
SHERIGAR
Location: HIGH
COURT OF 2. THE MANAGER LEGAL/CLAIMS,
KARNATAKA RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
2ND FLOOR, DARABAR SQUARE,
RAM MANDIR ROAD, OPP. BALAJI TEMPLE
VIJAYAPURA-586101.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SUBHASH MALLAPUR, ADV. FOR R2;
R1 DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, PRAYING TO
ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION AMOUNT PAYABLE TO THE
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6578
MFA No. 204192 of 2025
HC-KAR
APPELLANT BY SUITABLY MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND
AWARD DATED 20.09.2024 PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE II
ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT VII, VIJAYAPURA IN
MVC NO.1479/2019.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. This appeal is preferred by the claimant against the Judgment and award dated 20.09.2024 passed in MVC No.1479/2019 by the II Additional Senior Civil Judge and MACT VII, at Vijayapura (for short 'the tribunal'), seeking enhancement of the compensation.
2. The injured claimant aged 53 years working as cleaner met with accident on 26.02.2019 and he filed claim petition seeking compensation of Rs.15,00,000/-. The tribunal considering the entire evidence on record awarded compensation of Rs.1,63,763/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till award. Aggrieved by the said order this appeal is preferred in which it is contended that, the claimant was earning a sum of -3- NC: 2025:KHC-K:6578 MFA No. 204192 of 2025 HC-KAR Rs.15,000/- per month and the tribunal has taken Rs.13,250/- per month. P.W.3 the Doctor assessed the disability 16%, but the tribunal has taken 6% as functional disability and it is to be enhanced. Further he requests to enhance the rate of interest to 12% instead of 6%.
3. Heard the arguments of the learned counsels from both sides.
4. The Doctor P.W.3 has assessed the disability at 16%. 1/3rd of the 16% comes to 6%. Hence, the disability taken by the tribunal at 6% is proper and correct. Learned counsel for the claimant/appellant contended that, the age of the petitioner was shown as 54 years in Ex.P.7 and in other medical records, but in Ex.P.5 his age is shown as 60 years. The tribunal relied upon Ex.P.5 and considered the age of the claimant as 60 years. Considering the age mentioned in the Ex.P.7 and other medical records, this Court finds it reasonable to consider the age of the claimant as 54 years, for which the multiplier would be '11'. -4-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6578 MFA No. 204192 of 2025 HC-KAR
5. The claimant sustained communited displaced fracture of junction of middle and lower 1/3rd shaft of humerus, which is grievous in nature. P.W.2 issued disability certificate at Ex.P.11. P.W.2 in his cross examination deposed that, the claimant suffered healed surgical scar mark over the posterior aspect left arm measuring about 10 cm. He has also deposed about the restriction of elbow movement and rage of movement of shoulder in view of accidental injuries. Hence, the tribunal has considered 6% disability and it needs no interference. Since he met with accident in the year 2019, his income as per the guidelines of the Karnataka State Legal Services would be Rs.13,250/-. The tribunal has rightly taken the income of Rs.13,250/- and the loss of future is as under:
Rs.13,250/- X 12 X 11 X 6% = Rs.1,04,940/-.
6. The tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.70,063/- towards medical expenses, which needs no interference by this Court. The claimant was hospitalized for a period of 09 days as per Ex.P.5. This Court finds it reasonable to grant an -5- NC: 2025:KHC-K:6578 MFA No. 204192 of 2025 HC-KAR amount of Rs.50,000/- towards pain and suffering, Rs.25,000/- towards loss of amenities, Rs.30,000/- towards transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges. The claimant might not have attended any work for at least four months. Therefore, a sum of Rs.53,000/- (Rs.13,250/- X 4 months) is awarded towards loss of income during laid up period. The total compensation would be as under:
Sl.No. Heads of compensation Amounts 1 Loss of future income Rs.1,04,940/- 2 Pain and sufferings Rs.50,000/- 3 Loss of amenities Rs.25,000/- 4 Transportation, extra Rs.30,000/-
nourishment and attendant charges 5 Loss of income during laid Rs.53,000/-
up period 6 Medical expenses Rs.70,063/-
Total Rs.3,33,003/-
7. The claimant is entitled for total compensation of Rs.3,33,003/- along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization as against Rs.1,63,763/- awarded by the tribunal.
8. Learned counsel for the Insurance company submits that, the compensation amount awarded by the tribunal has been deposited before the tribunal. -6-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6578 MFA No. 204192 of 2025 HC-KAR
9. Accordingly, the following order:
ORDER
(i) The appeal is allowed in part;
(ii) The claimant is entitled for total compensation of Rs.3,33,003/- along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization as against Rs.1,63,763/-
awarded by the tribunal;
(iii) The Insurance company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs.1,69,240/- along with interest within one month from the date of this order;
(iv) On such deposit the claimant is permitted to withdraw the entire amount along with interest accrued on it.
(v) The claimant is not entitled for interest for the delayed period of 257 days.
sd/-
(P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE SVH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 79