Karnataka High Court
Mahesh S/O Adiveppa Adina vs Shekarappa S/O Shankrappa Horapeti on 9 October, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:13690
MFA No. 101701 of 2022
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. 101701/2022 (MV)
BETWEEN:
MAHESH
S/O. ADIVEPPA ADINA,
AGE: 34 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. BEVINAKATTI, TQ: RON,
DIST: GADAG-582101.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. P.G. MOGALI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
GIRIJA A.
BYAHATTI
1. SHEKARAPPA
Digitally signed by
GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI
Location: HIGH COURT
S/O. SHANKRAPPA HORAPETI,
OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DHARWAD
AGE: 44 YEARS,
OCC: OWNER CUM DRIVER OF
VEHICLE NO.KA-37/M-6806,
R/O. HULAGERI,
TQ: KUSHTAGI,
DIST: KOPPAL-583277.
2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE
COMPANY LIMITED,
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:13690
MFA No. 101701 of 2022
HC-KAR
R/O. CTS NO.472-474 VA,
KALBURGI SQUARE,
DESAI CROSS,
DESHPANDE NAGAR,
HUBBALLI,
TQ: HUBBALLI,
DIST: DHARWAD-580029.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SURESH S. GUNDI, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173 (1) OF MOTOR
VEHICLES ACT 1988 PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND
AWARD PASSED IN M.V.C. NO.420/2018 DATED 04.10.2019 BY
THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS
TRIBUNAL AT KUSHTAGI, BY ENHANCING THE COMPENSATION
TO RS.15,00,000/- ALONG WITH COST AND ENHANCED
INTEREST IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:13690
MFA No. 101701 of 2022
HC-KAR
CORAM: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) Heard Sri.P.G.Mogali learned counsel for the appellant as well as Sri.Suresh S.Gundi learned counsel for respondent No.2. At request of both the counsel, the matter is taken up for final hearing and disposal.
2. Challenge in this appeal is the award that is passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kushtagi (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal' for brevity) in MVC No.420/2018 dated 04.10.2019. This is the claimant's appeal. As against the claim for Rs.25,00,000/- in total, the Tribunal through the impugned award granted a sum of Rs.3,14,564/- as compensation and aggrieved by the same the present appeal is filed.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant, arguing the matter, contends that the appellant sustained grievous -4- NC: 2025:KHC-D:13690 MFA No. 101701 of 2022 HC-KAR injuries to his left leg and right shoulder, and the injuries resulted in permanent physical disability. Learned counsel submits that, without taking into consideration the nature of the injuries sustained, the Tribunal awarded a meagre sum as compensation under the head 'Loss of future earnings'. Learned counsel also states that the Tribunal failed to award any amount as compensation towards loss of income during laid up period. Learned counsel also states that the compensation granted under all other heads is also on the lower side. Learned counsel further submits that the appellant, as an agriculturalist and coolie, was earning Rs.500/- per day, but the Tribunal took the notional income as Rs.9,000/- per month. Learned counsel states that the accident occurred in the year 2017, and for the relevant period, the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority is taking the notional income as Rs.10,250/- per month, and at least said figure should have been considered by the Tribunal. Learned counsel thereby seeks for enhancement in compensation.
-5-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:13690 MFA No. 101701 of 2022 HC-KAR
4. The submission that is made by learned counsel for respondent No.2, on the other hand, is that the compensation granted by the Tribunal under each head is justifiable and therefore the award of the Tribunal needs no interference.
5. Having considered the totality of evidence produced, the Tribunal took the disability in respect of the whole body as 10%, which needs no interference. However, considering the submission that is made by learned counsel for the appellant, this Court considers desirable to take the notional income as Rs.10,250/- per month.
6. Having taken the notional income as Rs.10,250/ per month and without disturbing other parameters, that is, application of appropriate multiplier 16 and 10% as disability in respect of the whole body, the compensation which the appellant is entitled to receive under the head 'Loss of future earnings' is Rs.1,96,800/- (Rs.10,250 x 12 x 16 x 10%).
-6-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:13690 MFA No. 101701 of 2022 HC-KAR
7. Having considered the nature of injuries sustained, this Court is of the view that the appellant would not have attended his normal pursuits at least for a period of three months. Therefore, loss of earnings during laid up period comes to Rs.30,750/- (Rs.10,250 × 3).
8. Taking into consideration the totality of evidence produced and the submissions made by both the learned counsel, this Court is of the view that the appellant is entitled to compensation under the following heads:
Compensation for pain and Rs.30,000.00 suffering Towards food, extra Rs.15,000.00 nourishment, attendant and conveyance charges Loss of future earnings Rs.1,96,800.00 Medical expenses Rs.1,06,764.00 Loss of income during laid Rs.30,750.00 up period Loss of amenities in life Rs.10,000.00 Total Rs.3,89,314.00 -7- NC: 2025:KHC-D:13690 MFA No. 101701 of 2022 HC-KAR
9. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the appellant is entitled to a sum of Rs.3,89,314/- as compensation. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of with the following order:
ORDER i. The appeal is allowed in part. ii. The compensation that is granted by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kushtagi, through orders in MVC No.420/2018 dated 04.10.2019, is enhanced from Rs.3,14,564/- to Rs.3,89,314/-. 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 eight weeks -8- NC: 2025:KHC-D:13690 MFA No. 101701 of 2022 HC-KAR from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this judgment.
v. On such deposit, the appellant is permitted to withdraw the entire amount.
Sd/-
(CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE RH/gab CT-MCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 54