Karnataka High Court
Laxmi vs Nagappa And Anr on 23 October, 2025
Author: H.T.Narendra Prasad
Bench: H.T.Narendra Prasad
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6216-DB
MFA No. 202568 of 2023
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TYAGARAJA N. INAVALLY
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.202568 OF 2023 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
LAXMI
W/O TIMMAYYA,
AGE: 43 YEARS,
OCC: COOLIE,
R/OF: POST AKALAKUMPE,
TALUKA: DEODURGA,
DISTRICT: RAICHUR.
NOW AT RESIDENT IN LBS NAGAR,
Digitally signed by RAICHUR - 584 101.
BASALINGAPPA
SHIVARAJ ...APPELLANT
DHUTTARGAON
Location: HIGH
COURT OF (BY SRI BASAVARAJ R.MATH, ADVOCATE)
KARNATAKA
AND:
1. NAGAPPA
S/O NINGAPPA PUJARI,
AGE: MAJOR,
OCC: RIDER CUM OWNER OF
MOTORCYCLE BRG. NO KA-36/EJ-0391,
NARALABANDA, TALUKA: MANVI,
DISTRICT : RAICHUR - 584 123.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6216-DB
MFA No. 202568 of 2023
HC-KAR
2. THE GENERAL MANAGER,
THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE
COMPANY LIMITED,
OPP: VISHAL MARTK,
LINGASUGUR ROAD,
RAICHUR - 584 101.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI MOHD. ABDUL QUAYUM, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
V/O DATED 12.03.2024, NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE
MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, PRAYING TO MODIFY THE IMPUGNED
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 17.10.2022 PASSED BY PRL.
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND MEMBER, MACT,
RAICHUR IN MVC NO.94/2021, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE
AND EQUITY.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD
AND
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TYAGARAJA N. INAVALLY
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6216-DB
MFA No. 202568 of 2023
HC-KAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD) This appeal is by the claimant filed under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 17.10.2022 passed by the Principal District and Sessions Judge and MACT, Raichur in MVC No.94/2021 seeking enhancement of compensation.
2. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal briefly stated are that, on 07.09.2020 at about 4.00 p.m., the injured/petitioner was proceeding as a pillion rider on Motorcycle bearing Reg.No.KA-36/ER-8572 driven by one Mr. Amaresh, when they came near Sirwar Navalkal Main road, respondent No.1 being the rider of Motorcycle bearing Reg.No.KA-36/EJ-0391 came in high speed, rash and negligent manner and dashed to the petitioner's vehicle and thereby caused the accident. As a result of which, petitioner sustained severe injuries leading to her hospitalization to RIMS Hospital, Raichur and thereafter she was shifted to NIMHANS and Sparsha Hospital at -4- NC: 2025:KHC-K:6216-DB MFA No. 202568 of 2023 HC-KAR Bengaluru for higher treatment and she has been subjected for surgical and oral treatment and finally she was discharged on 19.09.2020 by spending huge amount. Hence, the claimant filed the claim petition under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act before the Claims Tribunal seeking compensation for the injuries sustained in the road traffic accident.
3. On service of summons, respondent Nos.1 and 2 appeared. Respondent No.2 filed written statement denying the entire averments made in the claim petition.
4. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the Claims Tribunal framed the issues and thereafter recorded the evidence. The claimant, in order to prove the case, examined himself as PW-1 besides examining the doctor as PW-2 and got exhibited documents namely, Ex.P1 to Ex.P22. On behalf of respondents, three witnesses are examined as R.Ws.1 to 3 and got marked three documents as Exs.R.1 to 3.
-5-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6216-DB MFA No. 202568 of 2023 HC-KAR
5. The Claims Tribunal, by the impugned judgment, inter alia, held that the accident took place on account of rash and negligent riding by the rider of the offending vehicle the accident took place and the claimant sustained injuries. The Tribunal, upon considering the oral and documentary evidence placed before it, held that the claimant is entitled to compensation of Rs.30,02,500/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. and directed the Insurance company to deposit the compensation amount along with interest. Being aggrieved, this appeal has been filed.
6. The learned counsel for the claimant has raised the following contentions:
a) Firstly, due to the accident the claimant has suffered grievous injuries. The claimant is completely bedridden and she unable to walk and do her day-to-day work. She has examined the doctor as P.W.2, who deposed that the claimant has suffered disability of 91% to the whole body. He further contended that due to -6- NC: 2025:KHC-K:6216-DB MFA No. 202568 of 2023 HC-KAR permanent disability, she is unable to move from the bed and she required the help of an attainder till her last breath. He further submits that no compensation is awarded under that head. Looking to the injuries suffered by the claimant, the disability assessed by the Tribunal at 91% is on the lower side and 100% disability has to be taken into consideration looking to the injuries suffered by the claimant.
b) Lastly, he has contended that in view of judgment of Hon'ble Apex in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi And Others [AIR 2017 SC 5157], the Tribunal has not added 25% to the income of the claimant towards future prospects having regard to the age of the claimant. Hence, he sought for enhancement of compensation by allowing the appeal.
7. On the other hand, Sri Mohd. Abdul Quayum, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 - Insurance Company contend that the claimant has examined the -7- NC: 2025:KHC-K:6216-DB MFA No. 202568 of 2023 HC-KAR doctor as P.W.2. In his evidence, he has deposed that the claimant has suffered 91% disability to the whole body. Considering the evidence of doctor, the Tribunal has rightly assessed whole body at 91%. He further contended that the doctor has deposed that claimant is required an Attainder throughout her life to do her day-to- day work and no medical records have been produced to establish the said contention. Therefore, the Tribunal rightly not awarded any compensation under that head.
8. Lastly, he has contended that considering the injuries suffered by the claimant, evidence of doctor and medical evidence, the overall compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable and sought for dismissal of the appeal.
9. Heard the learned counsel for the parties, perused the judgment and award of the Tribunal and also the appeal papers.
-8-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6216-DB MFA No. 202568 of 2023 HC-KAR
10. It is not in dispute that the claimant has suffered injury in a road traffic accident occurred on 07.09.2020 due to rash and negligent riding of the rider of the offending motorcycle bearing Reg.No.KA-36/EJ-0391. It is also not in dispute that due to the above accident, the claimant has suffered the following injuries:
"1) Generalised tenderness over abdomen
2) Loss of sensation of both lower limb
3) Restriction of movement of both lower limbs."
11. The claimant has examined the doctor as P.W.2 who treated her. We have gone through the records and evidence of the doctor. The disability assessed by the doctor is at 91% to the whole body. The claimant has produced photographs which are marked as Exs.P.13 to 19 to show that due to accidental injury, the claimant is unable to walk and do her day-to-day work and she is unable to even move without the support of an attainder as she is bedridden. Considering this material available on -9- NC: 2025:KHC-K:6216-DB MFA No. 202568 of 2023 HC-KAR record, the medical records, disability certificate and evidence of the doctor, the disability has to be assessed at 100%. The Tribunal in the absence of proof of income has assessed monthly income of the claimant at Rs.13,750/- p.m., which is just and proper and no interference is called by this Court.
12. In view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Pranay Sethi (supra), 25% of the income has to be added towards loss of future income. The age of the claimant is 40 years. The multiplier applicable to the age group of the claimant is '15'. On re- determination and re-assessment, the claimant is entitled to a sum of Rs.24,75,000/- (Rs.13,750*12*15*100%) under the head 'loss of future income'.
13. Further, due to the accidental injury, the claimant has suffered 100% disability and she is unable to move from the bed and therefore she requires one attainder for her support till her last breath. Considering
- 10 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6216-DB MFA No. 202568 of 2023 HC-KAR the evidence of doctor and injury suffered by the claimant, it would meet the ends of justice if a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- is awarded towards 'future attainder charges'. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal under other heads are just and reasonable.
14. On re-assessment and re-determination, the computation of compensation is as under:
Description By this Court
Pain and suffering Rs.1,00,000/-
Loss of Joy and
Rs.1,00,000/-
Pleasure
Medical attendant's,
conveyance and Rs.50,000/-
nourishment expenses
Loss of future
Rs.24,75,000/-
income/earnings
Medical expenses
(Past, Present and
Rs.5,00,000/-
future medical
expenses)
Future Attainder's
2,00,000/-
charges
Total Rs.34,25,000/-
15. In the result, we pass the following:
- 11 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6216-DB MFA No. 202568 of 2023 HC-KAR ORDER
a) The appeal is allowed in part.
b) The judgment of the Claims Tribunal is modified.
c) The claimant is entitled to a total compensation of Rs.34,25,000/- as against Rs.30,02,500/- awarded by the Tribunal along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum.
d) The Respondent No.2 - Insurance Company is directed to deposit entire compensation amount along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of realization, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
e) The deposit and release shall be as per the order of the Tribunal.
Sd/-
(H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE Sd/-
(TYAGARAJA N. INAVALLY) JUDGE BL List No.: 1 Sl No.: 48