Karnataka High Court
Anil @ Anilkumar vs Venkatesha on 9 October, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:13669
MFA No. 100985 of 2015
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 100985/2015 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
ANIL @ ANIL KUMAR S/O. GOVINDAPPA,
23 YEARS, R/O: HALAKUNDI VILLAGE,
BALLARI TALUK AND DISTRICT.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. ANKIT DESAI FOR
SRI. MALLIKARJUNSWAMY B. HIREMATH, ADVOCATES)
AND:
1. VENKATESHA S/O. LATE VENKATAPPA,
31 YEARS, DRIVER-CUM-OWNER OF
AUTO BEARING REG.NO.KA-16/B-4360,
R/O: POST OFFICE ROAD, MOLAKALMUR TOWN,
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT.
GIRIJA A.
2. THE BRANCH MANAGER,
BYAHATTI THE RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
Digitally signed by
PARVATHI NAGAR, OPP. BALA HOTEL,
GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI
Location: HIGH COURT
OF KARNATAKA
UPSTAIR BALLARI.
DHARWAD BENCH
DHARWAD ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SURESH S. GUNDI, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
NOTICE TO R1 IS SERVED)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR
VEHICLES ACT 1988, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS AND
MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 16.04.2014 IN
M.V.C. NO.158/2013 PASSED BY THE MEMBER, MOTOR
ACCIDENTS CLAIM TRIBUNAL-II BALLARI, BY ENHANCING THE
COMPENSATION REASONABLY AND ADEQUATELY, IN THE
INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:13669
MFA No. 100985 of 2015
HC-KAR
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA)
1. Heard Sri.Ankit Desai, who represents Sri.Mallikarjunswamy B. Hiremath, learned counsel on record for the appellant, as well as Sri.Suresh S. Gundi, learned counsel for respondent No.2. At the request of both the learned counsel, the matter is taken up for final hearing and disposal.
2. Being aggrieved by the sum that is awarded as compensation by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal- II, Bellary, through orders in MVC No.158/2013 dated 16.04.2014, the claimant is before this Court by filing an appeal.
3. Arguing the matter, learned counsel for the appellant contends that, as against the claim for Rs.10,00,000/- -3-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:13669 MFA No. 100985 of 2015 HC-KAR the Tribunal granted a meagre sum of Rs.1,74,018/- as compensation. Learned counsel submits that the appellant was working as coolie as on the date of the accident. He sustained grievous injuries, which resulted in shortening of the right lower limb by 2 centimetres. PW2 examined the appellant and assessed that there is disability of 38% in respect of the whole body. However, the Tribunal took the disability as 12.66% in respect of the whole body and awarded a meagre sum as compensation under the head 'Loss of future earnings'. Learned counsel submits the compensation that is granted by the Tribunal under other heads is also on the lower side.
4. The submission that is made by learned counsel for respondent No.2, on the other hand, is that the Tribunal, considering the evidence produced, awarded justifiable sum as compensation, and in case this Court intends, there may be marginal enhancement only.
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:13669 MFA No. 100985 of 2015 HC-KAR
5. The Tribunal, through the impugned order, awarded a sum of Rs.1,23,055/- towards loss of future earnings, Rs.5,000 towards pain and suffering, Rs.5,000/- towards conveyance and other incidental charges, Rs.2,000/- towards nourishment and Rs.36,363/- towards medical expenses. The Tribunal granted a sum of Rs.1,74,018/- in total.
6. By all the evidence produced, the appellant succeeded in establishing that he sustained an abrasion over the right knee, which is simple in nature and fracture of the mid-shaft of the right femur, which is grievous in nature. The appellant also established that he underwent open reduction and internal fixation for the grievous injury sustained.
7. The evidence of PW2 is that the fracture is malunited with implant in situ. Considering the evidence produced, the Tribunal opined that the disability in respect of whole body can be taken as 12.66%, which -5- NC: 2025:KHC-D:13669 MFA No. 100985 of 2015 HC-KAR needs no interference. As per the version of the appellant, he was earning Rs.6,000/- per month as agricultural coolie by the date of accident. The accident occurred in the year 2012. Therefore, for the relevant period, earning of Rs.6,000/- per month as an agricultural coolie is justifiable. Therefore, taking income of the appellant as Rs.6,000/- per month and without disturbing other parameters, the compensation which the appellant is entitled to receive towards loss of future earnings is Rs.1,64,073.6 rounded to Rs.1,64,074/- (Rs.6,000/- X 12 X 18 X 12.66%).
8. The Tribunal failed to award any amount towards loss of income during laid up period. Having considered the nature of injury sustained and the treatment taken which includes a surgery, this Court is of the view that the appellant could not have attended his normal pursuits at least for a period of 4 months. Thus, loss of earnings during laid up period comes to Rs.24,000/- -6-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:13669 MFA No. 100985 of 2015 HC-KAR (Rs.6,000/- X 4). Also this Court is of the view that the appellant is entitled to a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards pain and suffering, Rs.15,000/- towards food, extra nourishment, attendant and conveyance charges. Therefore, the total amount which the appellant is entitled to receive as compensation is as under:
Heads Amount in Rs.
Towards pain and suffering 25,000.00
Towards food, extra nourishment 15,000.00
attendant and conveyance charges Towards Medical expenses 36,363.00 Towards Loss future earnings 1,64,074.00 Towards loss of income during laid up 24,000.00 period TOTAL 2,64,437.00 Therefore, this Court is of the view that the appellant is entitled to a sum of Rs.2,64,437/- as compensation. Thus, the appeal is disposed of with the following:
ORDER
i) The appeal is allowed in part. -7-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:13669 MFA No. 100985 of 2015 HC-KAR
ii) The compensation that is granted by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-II, Bellary, through orders in MVC No.158/2013 dated 16.04.2014 is enhanced from Rs.1,74,018/- to Rs.2,64,437/-.
iii) The enhanced sum shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit.
iv) Respondent No.2 is directed to deposit the enhanced sum within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment.
v) On such deposit, the appellant is permitted to withdraw the entire amount.
Sd/-
(CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE gab/EM CT-MCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 35