Karnataka High Court
Jaganath vs Mouneshwar And Anr on 26 June, 2025
Author: Ravi V Hosmani
Bench: Ravi V Hosmani
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3401
MFA No. 200171 of 2024
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO. 200171 OF 2024 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
JAGANATH
S/O NARASAPPA SUNAGAR,
AGED: 42 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE AND COOLIE, NOW NIL,
R/O: CHIMA LADALI, TALUK: CHINCHOLI,
DISTRICT: KALABURAGI.
NOW R/AT: H.NO.54 KHADRI CHOWK,
KALABURAGI - 585 106.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI B.C.JAKA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. MOUNESHWAR
Digitally signed
by RAMESH S/O SHESHAPPA,
MATHAPATI AGE: MAJOR,
Location: HIGH OCC: OWNER OF THE VEHICLE NO.TS08FR 5720,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA R/AT: H.NO.4-494, BRAHMAJI COLONY,
NGARAM, HYDERABAD - 500 004.
2. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.
THROUGH ITS DIVISIONAL OFFICE AND MANAGER,
OPP: SANGAM THEATRE, IIND FLOOR,
SUPER MARKET, KALABURAGI - 585 102.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. SANGEETA BHADRASHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH)
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3401
MFA No. 200171 of 2024
HC-KAR
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE M.V. ACT,
PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL BY MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT
AND AWARD DATED-12-09-2023, IN M.V.C.NO.570/2022, PASSED
BY THE I ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT AT KALABURAGI
AND CONSEQUENTLY BE PLEASED TO ENHANCE THE
COMPENSATION OF RS.10,00,000/-, WITH INTEREST 12% PER
ANNUM FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ACTUAL REALIZATION.
THIS MFA, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT
WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI
ORAL JUDGMENT
Challenging judgment and award dated 12.09.2023
passed by I Addl. Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Kalaburagi, in
MVC no.570/2022, this appeal is filed.
2. Sri B.C.Jaka, learned counsel submitted appeal was
by claimant for enhancement of compensation. It was
submitted at 6.30 p.m. on 29.11.2020, when claimant along
with others was returning to their village by walk, rider of
motorcycle bearing registration no.TS-08/FR-5720 rode it in
rash and negligent manner and dashed against pedestrians. In
accident, claimant sustained several fractural injuries. Despite
taking treatment at Government Hospital, Chandapur,
Chincholli and GIMS Hospital, Kalaburagi, he did not recover
fully and sustained permanent physical disability/loss of earning
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3401
HC-KAR
capacity. Therefore, he filed claim petition under Section 166 of
M.V.Act, against owner and insurer of motorcycle.
3. On contest, wherein owner remained absent and he
was placed ex-parte. Respondent no.2-insurer opposed claim
petition on all grounds.
4. Based on pleadings, tribunal framed issues and
recorded evidence, wherein claimant examined himself as PW.1
and examined Doctor Raju Kulkarni as PW.2 and got marked
Exs.P.1 to P.14. On behalf of respondent-Insurance Company,
its official was examined as RW.1 and got marked documents
as Exs.R1 and R2.
5. On consideration, Tribunal held accident had
occurred due to rash and negligent riding of motorcycle by its
rider, claimant sustained loss of earning capacity and therefore
entitled for compensation. It held insurer liable to pay
compensation assessed as follows:
Sl.No. Heads Amount
1 Loss of future earning, disability -Nil-
2 Pain and suffering Rs.40,000/-
3 Medical expenses Rs.240/-
Total Rs.40,240/-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3401
HC-KAR
6. Dissatisfied with same, claimant was in appeal.
7. It was submitted though claimant sustained several
fractural injuries, tribunal awarded meager compensation
towards pain and suffering and medical expenses and sought
enhancement.
8. On other hand, Smt.Sangeeta Bhadrashetty,
learned counsel for respondent no.2-insurer opposed appeal. It
was submitted tribunal had taken note of facts and
circumstances, appreciated them in proper perspective and
held claimant entitled for only compensation under pain and
suffering and medical expenses. Therefore, award did not call
for interference.
9. Heard learned counsel, perused impugned
judgment and award, certified copies of deposition and exhibits
made available for perusal of this Court by learned counsel for
respondent-insurer.
10. From above, it is seen this appeal is by claimant for
enhancement of compensation and insurer has not preferred
appeal, point that would arise for consideration is:
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3401
HC-KAR
"Whether claimant is entitled for enhancement of
compensation as prayed for?
11. Findings of tribunal regarding occurrence of
accident due to rash and negligent riding of insured vehicle by
its rider, claimant sustaining injuries and insurer being liable to
pay compensation are not in dispute.
12. Claim petition was filed alleging that claimant had
sustained several fractural injuries i.e., fracture of both hands,
amputation of left finger, left hand fracture of pelvis, fracture of
left foot, fracture of right leg, fracture of humerus and ulna and
grievous injuries over other parts of body. However, Ex.P10-
wound certificate issued by Government Hospital, shows nature
of injuries as simple. Even Ex.P8-disability certificate issued by
PW.2 refers to mal-united fracture of first metacarpal. Though,
there is reference to X-rays of hand, pelvis area and left finger
in Ex.P11, no fractures were found. It is also seen that PW.2
had assessed upper limb disability at 20% and sought to
explain it on account of loss of grip, strength and inability to lift
heavy weight. Normally, fracture of metacarpal would not
cause any serious disability. Moreover, normally right hand will
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3401
HC-KAR
be dominant and left hand would be supportive. Loss of grip,
strength to some extent cannot be held to be resulting in loss
of earning capacity. However, on account of fracture sustained,
claimant would have been away from work for at-least two
months. Taking said period of lay-off and adopting notional
income for year 2020 i.e., date of accident as Rs.13,750/-,
claimant would be entitled for Rs.27,500/- towards loss of
income during laid up period. Claimant is also awarded
Rs.15,000/- towards loss of amenities.
13. Tribunal has awarded only Rs.240/- towards
medical expenses against bills produced. Claimant has taken
treatment in Government Hospitals for about 6 days. Taking
note of same, it would be appropriate to award Rs.7,500/-
towards attendant, food and other incidental expenses. Thus,
total compensation would be re-assessed as follows:
Sl.No. Heads Amount
1 Loss of future earning, disability Rs.27,500/-
2 Pain and suffering Rs.40,000/-
3 Other incidental expenses Rs.7,500/-
4 Loss of amenities Rs.15,000/-
5 Medical expenses Rs.00,240/-
Total Rs.90,240/-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3401
HC-KAR
14. In view of above, point for consideration is
answered partly in affirmative. Consequently, following:
ORDER
i. Appeal is allowed in part.
ii. Judgment and award passed by tribunal, is
modified.
iii. Claimant is held entitled for re-assessed
compensation of Rs.90,240/- as against
Rs.40,240/- awarded by Tribunal with interest at
6% per annum from date of claim petition till
deposit.
iv. Respondent-insurer to deposit same before Tribunal
within a period of six weeks.
Sd/-
(RAVI V HOSMANI)
JUDGE
MSR
