Karnataka High Court
Veeranna vs Ravindra And Anr on 21 August, 2025
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4829
MFA No. 200517 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 200626 of 2020
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO. 200517 OF 2021 (MV-I)
C/W
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO. 200626 OF 2020
IN M.F.A.NO.200517/2021
BETWEEN:
VEERANNA
S/O DANDAPPA ALUR,
AGE: 43 YEARS,
OCC: MEDICAL SHOP BUSINESS AND
AGRICULTURE NOW NIL,
R/O: VILLAGE PALA,
TQ: AND DIST: KALABURAGI
NOW R/AT: JAINAGAR KALABURAGI.
Digitally signed
...APPELLANT
by RENUKA
Location: HIGH (BY SRI SANJEEV PATIL, ADVOCATE)
COURT OF
KARNATAKA AND:
1. RAVINDRA
S/O ANNARAO INGIN,
AGE: MAJOR,
OCC: NOT KNOW,
R/O: H.NO.4601, NEW EXTENSION AREA,
M.B. NAGAR, KALABURAGI - 585 104.
2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
DIVISIONAL OFFICE, 2ND FLOOR,
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4829
MFA No. 200517 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 200626 of 2020
HC-KAR
CENTURY COMPLEX, OPP. SANGAM TALKIES,
SUPER MARKET, KALABURAGI - 585 102.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI J. AUGUSTIN, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE
MOTOR VEHICLES ACT PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT
AND AWARD PASSED BY THE II ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE
AND MACT, KALABURAGI IN MVC NO.280/2019 DATED
28.01.2020 BY ENHANCING THE COMPENSATION AS PRAYED
FOR, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
IN M.F.A.NO.200626/2020
BETWEEN:
THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
DIVISIONAL OFFICE, 2ND FLOOR,
CENTURY COMPLEX, OPP. SANGAM TALKIES,
SUPER MARKET, KALABURAGI - 585 102.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI J.AUGUSTIN, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. VEERANNA
S/O DANDAPPA ALUR,
AGE: 42 YEARS,
OCC: MEDICAL SHOP BUSINESS AND
AGRICULTURE NOW NIL,
R/O: VILLAGE PALA,
TQ: AND DIST: KALABURAGI
NOW R/AT: JAINAGAR KALABURAGI - 585 104.
2. RAVINDRA
S/O ANNARAO INGIN,
AGE: MAJOR,
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4829
MFA No. 200517 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 200626 of 2020
HC-KAR
OCC: NOT KNOW,
R/O: H.NO.4601, NEW EXTENSION AREA,
M.B. NAGAR, KALABURAGI - 585 104.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SANJEEV PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE
MOTOR VEHICLES ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT
AND AWARD DATED 28.01.2020 PASSED IN
M.V.C.NO.280/2019 BY THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE AND M.A.C.T., KALABURAGI, REDUCING THE QUANTUM
OF COMPENSATION AND ETC.
THESE MFAS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR
AMARANNAVAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. MFA No.200517/2021 is filed by the claimant
seeking enhancement of the compensation. MFA
No.200626/2020 is filed by the Insurance Company
challenging the quantum of compensation awarded. The
impugned award in both the appeals is dated 28.01.2020
passed in MVC No.280/2019 by the II Additional Senior Civil
Judge, Kalaburagi (for short 'the tribunal').
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4829
HC-KAR
2. Heard the learned counsel for the claimant and
the learned counsel for the Insurance Company in both the
appeals.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant/claimant would
contend that, the appellant/claimant was running a medical
shop and also was doing agricultural work and considering
the same, the income taken by the tribunal is on lower side.
He further submits that, the disability stated by the Doctor -
P.W.2 is 31.77% and the tribunal has taken the disability at
11.00% and the same is not proper and correct. The
claimant has sustained fracture of lower end of right radius
and he was admitted in hospital for three days and there is a
surgery wherein, an implant is fixed and it requires to be
removed. Considering the same, the compensation awarded
for pain and suffering, loss of income during laid up period,
loss of amenities and attendant charges are on lower side.
As the claimant requires surgery for removal of implant, he
is entitle for future medical expenses. The tribunal has not
awarded future medical expenses. With this, he prays for
enhancement of compensation.
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4829
HC-KAR
4. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company
submits that, the injury i.e. fracture has not affected the
income of the claimant as he is running medical shop and
prays for reducing the compensation awarded by the
tribunal.
5. Having heard the learned counsels, this Court has
perused the impugned Judgment and the trial Court records.
6. The accident has taken place in the year 2019. As
per the chart prepared for settlement of disputes in Lok
Adalath, the notional income for the year 2019 is
Rs.13,250/- per month. Therefore, the income taken by the
tribunal is on lower side. The claimant was running a medical
shop and was also doing agricultural work. Therefore, the
income has to be taken at Rs.13,250/- as per the chart.
7. The claimant has sustained fracture of lower end
of right radius and he underwent surgery and an implant has
been fixed. P.W.2 is the Doctor who assessed the disability
and issued disability certificate as per Ex.P.8, wherein the
disability is stated as 37.77%. The tribunal has taken
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4829
HC-KAR
disability at 11.00%. The claimant was not only doing
business of medical shop, but was also doing agricultural
work. Therefore, the disability has affected his income.
Therefore, the contention of the learned counsel for the
Insurance Company cannot be accepted. The age of the
claimant as on the date of the accident is 42 years and
considering the same, the multiplier '14' taken by the
tribunal is proper and correct. Considering the same, loss of
future income would be as under:
Rs.13,250/- X 12 X 14 X 11% = Rs.2,44,860/-
8. The claimant has sustained one fracture and
underwent a surgery and an implant is fixed. Considering the
same, the compensation awarded by the tribunal for pain
and suffering in a sum of Rs.20,000/- is on lower side. The
claimant is entitle for compensation of Rs.30,000/- towards
pain and sufferings.
9. The claimant has been admitted in the Hospital
for three days and he underwent surgery and considering the
same, he is entitle for loss of income during laid up period
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4829
HC-KAR
for three days in a sum of Rs.13,250/- X 3 days =
Rs.39,750/-.
10. Considering the fracture sustained and age of the
claimant, loss of amenities as awarded by the tribunal in a
sum of Rs.10,000/- is on lower side. The claimant is entitle
for loss of amenities in a sum of Rs.20,000/-.
11. The claimant has been admitted in Hospital for
three days and therefore, he is entitle for attendant charges,
food and conveyance charges in a sum of Rs.1,000/- per
day, i.e. Rs.1,000/- X 3 days = Rs.3,000/-. The Doctor who
examined the claimant and issued Ex.P.8 - disability
certificate i.e. P.W.2 has stated in his certificate and also in
his evidence that, there is a need for removal of implant
fixed and expenses for the same is Rs.60,000/- to
Rs.70,000/- in private hospitals. Considering the fact that,
the claimant requires surgery for removal of the implant, he
is entitle for future medical expenses of Rs.30,000/-. The
medical expenses awarded by the tribunal in a sum of
Rs.42,200/- is proper and correct.
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4829
HC-KAR
12. Considering the above aspect, the claimant is
entitle for the following compensation:
Sl.No. Heads of compensation Compensation
awarded by
this Court
1 Future loss of income Rs.2,44,860/-
2 Pain and sufferings Rs.30,000/-
3 Laid up period (Rs.13,250 X 3) Rs.39,750/-
4 Attendant charges Rs.3,000/-
5 Loss of amenities Rs.20,000/-
6 Medical expenses Rs.42,200/-
7 Future medical expenses Rs.30,000/-
Total Rs.4,09,810/-
13. Hence, the claimant is entitle for total
compensation of Rs.4,09,810/-, as against Rs.2,68,500/-
awarded by the tribunal.
14. In view of the above, the following:
ORDER
(i) MFA No.200626/2020 filed by the
Insurance Company is dismissed;
(ii) MFA No.200517/2021 filed by the
claimant is allowed in-part;
(iii) The claimant is entitle for total
compensation of Rs.4,09,810/- as against
Rs.2,68,500/- awarded by the tribunal;
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4829
HC-KAR
(iv) The rate of interest on the
compensation and order of deposit passed by the
tribunal remains unaltered;
(v) The Insurance Company shall deposit
the compensation amount with interest within a
period of six weeks from this day, failing which it is
liable to pay interest at the rate of 9% per annum,
till payment;
(vi) The amount deposited by the Insurance
Company is ordered to be transmitted to the
tribunal.
Sd/-
(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR)
JUDGE
SVH
