Karnataka High Court
Sri. Chandraiah T R vs Sri Mohammed Gous Peer on 6 March, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:13737
M.F.A. No.2440/2020
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.2440/2020 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
SRI. CHANDRAIAH T.R.
S/O REVANASIDDAIAH
AGED 29 YEARS
Digitally signed R/O TYAGATURU, NITTUR HOBLI
by ARSHIFA GUBBI TALUK
BAHAR KHANAM TUMAKURU DISTRICT.
Location: HIGH
COURT OF ...APPELLANT
KARNATAKA
(BY SRI. M.B. CHANDRACHOODA, ADV.,)
AND:
1. SRI. MOHAMMED GOUS PEER
S/O MAHAMMED MOHIDDIN
AGED 49 YEARS
R/O KITTADAKUPPE, KASABA HOBLI
GUBBI TALUK
TUMAKURU DISTRICT.
2. THE MANAGER
TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD.
BRANCH OFFICE:LAKSHMIVITTAL BANK
UPSTAIRS, NEAR TGMC BUNK
TUMKURU DISTRICT.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. B. PRADEEP, ADV., FOR R2
R1 SERVED)
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:13737
M.F.A. No.2440/2020
HC-KAR
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED.22.10.2019, PASSED IN MVC
NO.102/2019, ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC., AND ADDITIONAL MACT, GUBBI,
PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION
AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
ORAL JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed by the injured appellant seeking for higher compensation challenging the judgment and award dated 22.10.2019 passed in MVC.No.102/2019 by the Additional Senior Civil Judge and Additional MACT, Gubbi, (for short 'Tribunal').
2. Though this appeal is listed for admission, with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, it is taken up for final disposal.
3. Sri.M.B.Chandrachooda, learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the Tribunal has erred in awarding meager compensation to the injured appellant by ignoring the evidence of PW2 and Ex.P4 to -3- NC: 2026:KHC:13737 M.F.A. No.2440/2020 HC-KAR Ex.P6. Hence, he seeks to allow the appeal by enhancing the compensation appropriately.
4. Per contra, Sri.B.Pradeep, learned counsel for respondent No.2, supports the impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal and submits that the Tribunal assessed the income of the appellant as per Ex.P12, which indicates that he was drawing a salary of Rs.10,000/- per month. It is submitted that the appellant sustained one fracture and considering the same, the Tribunal has rightly assessed the disability at 5% and awarded just compensation under the other heads, which needs no interference. Hence, he seeks to dismiss the appeal.
5. I have heard the arguments on both the sides and perused the material available on record.
6. The records indicate that on 10.02.2018 the appellant met with a road accident and sustained the following injury:
-4-
NC: 2026:KHC:13737 M.F.A. No.2440/2020 HC-KAR
a) Fracture, Lateral malleolus right ankle, underwent ORIF with LCP.
The appellant was an inpatient at Adithya Hospital for more than 10 days and was provided treatment. The appellant examined PW2, who assessed the disability at 30% to a particular limb and 10% to the whole body. However, considering the same, the Tribunal assessed the disability at 5%. In my view, the same is required to be reassessed at 7% for the purpose of determination of compensation.
7. Insofar as the income is concerned, the appellant has specifically pleaded and produced evidence before the Tribunal that he was working as a trainee in HAL and also engaged in agriculture. In support of his traineeship, he produced the letter at Ex.P12. Considering the said assertion and also keeping in mind the fact that the notional income for unskilled labor, as prepared by the KSLSA is Rs.12,500/-, if the same is assessed, the interest -5- NC: 2026:KHC:13737 M.F.A. No.2440/2020 HC-KAR of justice would be met. Accordingly, the income of the appellant is reassessed at the said rate. It is not in dispute that the claimant was aged about 26 years at the time of the accident; hence, the appropriate multiplier would be 17, which has been rightly considered by the Tribunal. Having reassessed the income and disability of the appellant, the appellant/claimant is entitled to compensation under the head of loss of future income due to disability as under:
Rs.12,500 X 12 X 17 X 7% = Rs.1,78,500/-.
8. The Tribunal has not awarded any compensation under the head of loss of income during the laid-up period, which is required to be awarded in this case. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.86,500/- towards medical expenses which remains unaltered. However, taking note of the oral evidence of PW2, documents Ex.P4 to P6, P16 and other medical records, I am of the considered view that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under other heads is required to be reassessed -6- NC: 2026:KHC:13737 M.F.A. No.2440/2020 HC-KAR appropriately by enhancing the same. The appellant is entitled to the modified compensation as under:
HEADS AMOUNT
(in Rs.)
Pain & suffering 40,000
Loss of amenities 30,000
Medical expenses 86,500
Loss of income during laid-up period 37,500
(Rs.12,500 X 3)
Loss of future income due to disability 1,78,500
Towards conveyance, attendant charges, 25,000
food and nourished food
Total 3,97,500
Thus, the appellant-claimant shall be entitled to total compensation of Rs.3,97,500/- as against Rs.2,43,500/- awarded by the Tribunal.
9. In the result, this Court proceeds to pass the following:
ORDER
a) Appeal stands allowed in part.
b) The impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal is modified to an extent that the appellant-claimant would be entitled to a total -7- NC: 2026:KHC:13737 M.F.A. No.2440/2020 HC-KAR compensation of Rs.3,97,500/- as against Rs.2,43,500/- awarded by the Tribunal.
c) The enhanced compensation amount shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of payment.
d) 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.
e) On such deposit, the Tribunal shall release the entire enhanced compensation amount in favour of the appellant.
f) Draw modified award accordingly.
Sd/-
(VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE ABK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20