Karnataka High Court
Sri. R. Devaraju vs The Manager on 16 January, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:1630
MFA No. 6809 of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.6809 OF 2016(MV-I)
BETWEEN:
SRI. R. DEVARAJU,
S/O RANGASHAMAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS,
R/A BISKUR, KUDUR HOBLI,
MAGADI TALUK,
RAMANAGARA DISTRICT.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. YOGESHA G.K., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE MANAGER,
UNIVERSAL SAMPO GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD.,
NO.7/3, 2ND FLOOR,
Digitally signed
by AASEEFA ABOVE BARCLAY'S FINANCE,
PARVEEN OPPOSITE 100 FEET ROAD,
Location: HIGH OLD MADRAS ROAD,
COURT OF INDRANAGAR,
KARNATAKA BANGALORE-560 038.
2. M/S. KARTHIK ROOFING'S,
NO.76, ANDRAHALLI MAIN ROAD,
BASAVESHWARA INDUSTRIAL ENTRANCE,
PEENYA 2ND STAGE,
BANGALORE(RC OWNER) 560 058.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. RAVI SHANKAR S SAMPRATHI, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
NOTICE TO R2 IS D/W, V/O/D 03.03.2022)
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:1630
MFA No. 6809 of 2016
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 8.7.2016 PASSED IN MVC
NO.2462/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE 21ST ADDITIONAL SMALL
CAUSES JUDGE, 19TH ACMM, MEMBER, MACT, BENGALURU,
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 DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Heard Sri. Yogesha G.K, learned counsel for the
appellant as well as Sri.Ravi S Samprathi, learned counsel
for respondent No.1.
2. Challenge in this appeal is the order that is
rendered by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore
in M.V.C. No.2462/2015 dated 08.07.2016. This is a
claimant's appeal.
3. On the ground that he sustained injuries in a road
traffic accident and became permanently disabled, the
petitioner filed a petition claiming compensation of
NC: 2025:KHC:1630
Rs.5,00,000/- in total. The tribunal which dealt with the
matter, subjecting the evidence of PW's Nos.1 and 2 and
Ex's.P-1 to P-15 to scrutiny, held that the appellant is
entitled to a sum of Rs.3,15,980/- as compensation.
4. Arguing the matter, learned counsel for the
appellant contends that the appellant sustained grievous
injuries in a road traffic accident. Through the evidence of
PW-2, he not only established the nature of injuries
sustained, but also the disability which is permanent in
nature. However, the tribunal awarded a meager sum as
compensation under all heads. Learned counsel for the
petitioner also contends that the petitioner was working as
incharge of production in HHU Solar Private Limited and
was earning Rs.12,000/- per month by the date of
accident. However, the tribunal took the notional income
as Rs.8,000/- per month which is unfair. Learned counsel
also states that the accident occurred in the year 2015 and
for the relevant period even the Karnataka State Legal
Services Authority is taking notional income as Rs.9,000/-
NC: 2025:KHC:1630
per month and atleast the said figure should have been
considered by the tribunal. Learned counsel ultimately
seeks for enhancement of compensation.
5. Learned counsel for respondent No.1 on the other
hand states that the compensation awarded by the
tribunal is justifiable. However, learned counsel submits
that there may be a marginal enhancement by taking the
notional income as Rs.9,000/- per month.
6. The tribunal through the impugned order awarded
a sum of Rs.3,15,980/- as compensation divided under
following heads:-
Sl. Description Amount
No
1 Pain and suffering 25,000-00
2 Medical expenses 68,820-00
3 Loss of future income 2,12,160-00
4 Food, conveyance &
10,000-00
nourishment
Total 3,15,980-00
NC: 2025:KHC:1630
7. By all the evidence produced, the appellant
succeeded in establishing that he sustained fracture neck
of 4th metacarpal bone, grade II compound communited
right calcaneum fracture and heel pad avulsion. PW-2
assessed the disability in respect of whole body as 13%.
8. The submission made to take the notional income
as Rs.9,000/- per month is justifiable. Therefore, taking
the income as Rs.9,000/- per month and without
distributing other parameters that is application of
multiplier '17' and the disability in respect of whole body
as 13%, the compensation which the appellant is entitled
to under the head loss of future earnings on account of
permanent physical disability to the whole body will be
Rs.2,38,680/- (9,000/- x 17 x 12 x 13%).
9. The tribunal failed to award any sum as
compensation for the loss of income during laid up period.
Having considered the nature of injuries sustained, this
Court is of the view that the appellant would have taken
bed rest atleast for a period of three months. Therefore,
NC: 2025:KHC:1630
the compensation which the appellant is entitled to under
the head loss of income during laid up period is
Rs.27,000 /-(Rs.9000 x 3). Also the appellant is entitled to
a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards loss of amenities in life.
That apart, this Court considers desirable to enhance the
compensation granted under the heads pain and suffering
and towards the amount which the appellant would have
incurred for his food, extra nourishment, conveyance and
attendant charges. Therefore, the compensation which the
appellant is entitled to under each head is as under:-
Sl. Description Amount
No
1 Compensation for pain
35,000-00
and suffering
2 Medical expenses 68,820-00
3 Loss of future earnings 2,38,680-00
4 Towards food, extra
nourishment, conveyance 15,000-00
and attendant charges
5 Loss of income during
27,000-00
laid up period
6 Loss of amenities in life 10,000-00
Total 3,94,500-00
NC: 2025:KHC:1630
10. As earlier stated the tribunal awarded a sum of
Rs.3,15,980/- only as compensation. However, the
justifiable sum which the appellant is entitled to is
Rs.3,94,500/-.
11. Therefore, the appeal is disposed of with the
following:-
ORDER
i. The appeal is allowed in part.
ii. The compensation that is granted by the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru through orders
in M.V.C. No.2462/2015 dated 08.07.2016 is
enhanced from Rs.3,15,980/- to Rs.3,94,500/-.
iii. The enhanced sum shall carry interest at the rate of
6% per annum from the date of petition till the date
of deposit.
NC: 2025:KHC:1630
iv. Respondent No.1 is directed to deposit the enhanced
sum within the period of eight weeks from the date
of receipt of copy of this order
v. On such deposit, the appellant is permitted to
withdraw the entire amount.
Sd/-
(DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA)
JUDGE
VS
