Karnataka High Court
Ambamma W/O. Gadilingappa vs Vallam Shetty Venkata Sheshaiah on 12 November, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:15484
MFA No. 101254 of 2024
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101254 OF 2024 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
AMBAMMA W/O. GADILINGAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURAL COOLIE,
R/O. WARD NO.2, HANDYALARA ONI,
KOLUR VILLAGE,
BALLARI TALUK AND DISTRICT-583101.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. AKASH, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. Y. LAKSHMIKANT REDDY, ADVOCATE)
GIRIJA A.
BYAHATTI AND:
Digitally signed by
GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI 1. VALLAM SHETTY VENKATA SHESHAIAH,
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA S/O. VALLAM SHETTY ANJINEYULU,
DHARWAD BENCH
DHARWAD
DRIVER OF THE TRACTOR AND
TRAILER BEARING REG.
NO.AP-27/AD-3487 AND AP-27/AD-3488,
R/O. GOPALAPURA CAMP,
BALLUR VILLAGE,
BALLARI TALUK AND DISTRICT-583101.
2. ANJINEYULU VALLAM SHETTY,
S/O. VENKATESHWARULU,
OWNER OF THE TRACTOR AND
TRAILER BEARING REG.
NO.AP-27/AD-3487 AND
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:15484
MFA No. 101254 of 2024
HC-KAR
AP-27/AD-3488
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,
R/O. D.NO.6-333, CHADALAWADA,
CHIRALA ROAD,
N.G. PAU DISTRICT,
PRAKASAM,
ANDHRA PRADESH-523183.
3. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,
POLICY ISSUED AT VIJAYA COMPLEX,
DHARAVARI GARDEN,
WARD NO.3, STATION ROAD,
ONGOLE, PRAKASAM,
ANDHRA PRADESH, BRANCH LOCAL ADDRESS IS
SIRUGUPPA ROAD,
BALLARI-583101.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. JAVALI GURURAJENDRA, ADVOCATE FOR R3;
R1 AND R2-NOTICE DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR
VEHICLE ACT, 1988 PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL BY
MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 01.07.2023
PASSED BY THE MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL-XII AT
BALLARI IN MVC NO.306/2019 BY ENHANCING THE
COMPENSATION TO RS.14,99,000/- THE APPELLANT AND PASS
SUCH OTHER ORDER OR ORDERS AS THIS HON'BLE COURT
DEEMS FIT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR DISMISSAL THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:15484
MFA No. 101254 of 2024
HC-KAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA)
Heard Sri Akash, who represents Sri Y.Lakshmikant
Reddy, learned council on record for the appellant, as well
as Sri Javali Gururajendra, learned counsel for respondent
No.3.
2. Challenging the award that is passed by the
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-XII, Ballari in MVC 306 of
2019 dated 01.07.2022, the present appeal is filed. This is a
claimant's appeal.
3. The appellant who admittedly sustained fracture
of right femur filed a petition claiming compensation. The
tribunal through the impugned award granted a sum of
Rs.2,87,550/- as compensation. The version of the
appellant is that she is entitled to a higher sum.
4. Arguing the matter, learned counsel for the
appellant submits that the appellant sustained fracture to
the right femur. Femur is an important organ in the human
NC: 2025:KHC-D:15484
HC-KAR
body. The evidence of PW3 clearly establishes that the
disability is 36%, which is permanent and partial in nature.
But the tribunal took the disability in respect of whole body
as 12% only. Learned counsel also states that the
compensation granted towards 'loss of income during laid
up period' is grossly low. Learned counsel further submits
that no amount is awarded as compensation towards 'loss
of amenities in life'. Learned counsel thereby seeks for
enhancement in compensation.
5. The submission that is made by learned counsel
for respondent No.3 is that the appellant is not entitled for
any compensation in the light of his own statement as
found at ground No.12 of the grounds of appeal. Ground
No.12 of the grounds of appeal reads as under:
"12. The tribunal has not erred in awarding a
meager sum towards Hospitalization and medical
bills. Hence the order of the tribunal is liable to
be modified."
NC: 2025:KHC-D:15484
HC-KAR
6. Learned counsel for the appellant states that
there is a typographical error and therefore the contents of
ground No.12 are required to be ignored.
7. It is not in dispute that the appellant sustained a
grievous injury. The tribunal subjecting the evidence of
PW.3 to scrutiny rightly took the disability in respect of
whole body as 12%. However, the tribunal awarded a sum
of Rs.11,750/- only towards 'loss of income during laid up
period'. But having sustained fracture to femur, this Court is
of the view that the appellant could not have attended her
normal pursuits at least for a period of 3 months. Therefore
the compensation granted towards 'loss of earnings during
laid up period' is on lower side as rightly contented by
learned counsel for the appellant. Also the appellant is
entitled for compensation towards 'loss of amenities in life'.
So far as the compensation granted under all other heads is
concerned, this Court does not find any grounds for
interference as the compensation granted is justifiable.
Therefore this Court is of the view that globally the
NC: 2025:KHC-D:15484
HC-KAR
appellant is entitled to an additional sum of Rs.40,000/-.
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-
XII, Ballari through orders in MVC 306
of 2019 dated 01.07.2022 is enhanced
by Rs.40,000/-.
(iii) The enhanced sum shall carry interest
at the rate of 6% per annum from the
date of petition till the date of deposit.
(iv) Respondent No.3 is directed to deposit
the enhanced sum within a period of 8
weeks from the date of receipt of
certified copy of this judgment.
(v) On such deposit, the appellant is
permitted to withdraw the entire
amount.
Sd/-
(CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA)
JUDGE
EM
