Arun S/O Gopal Chavan vs Muttanna Nirunnappa Biradar
2025 Latest Caselaw 9830 Kant

Karnataka High Court

Arun S/O Gopal Chavan vs Muttanna Nirunnappa Biradar on 5 November, 2025

                                                 -1-
                                                           NC: 2025:KHC-D:15106
                                                        MFA No. 101407 of 2014


                        HC-KAR




                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD
                        DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025
                                             BEFORE
                       THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. MURALIDHARA PAI
                                 M.F.A. NO.101407 OF 2014 (MV-I)
                       BETWEEN:

                       ARUN S/O. GOPAL CHAVAN,
                       AGE: 24 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
                       SINCE UNSOUND MIND, REPRESENTED BY HIS
                       NATURAL FATHER GOPAL S/O. THAVARAPPA CHAVAN,
                       AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC: SERVICE,
                       R/O. DURGA VIHAR TANDA, STATION ROAD,
                       WARD NO.10, TQ. & DIST: BAGALKOT.
                                                                  ..APPELLANT
                       (BY SRI. PRASHANT S. KADADEVAR, ADVOCATE)

                       AND:

                       1. MUTTANNA NIRUNNAPPA BIRADAR,
                          AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: OWNER OF VEHICLE,
                          R/O. NEAR BASAV TEMPLE, AT: POST MINAJAGI,
Digitally signed by
V N BADIGER               TQ: MUDDEBIHAL, DIST: BIJAPUR.
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH
                       2. SRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
                          REPRESENTED BY DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
                          S/5, II FLOOR, MONARK CHAMBER,
                          INFANTRY ROAD, BANGALORE-560001.
                                                                  ...RESPONDENTS
                       (BY SRI. NAGARAJ C. KOLLOORI, ADV. FOR R2;
                           NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH)

                            THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
                       SECTION 173 (1) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, PRAYING TO
                       MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 05.10.2013,
                       PASSED BY THE MEMBER OF MACT NO.IV BAGALKOT AT:
                              -2-
                                        NC: 2025:KHC-D:15106
                                     MFA No. 101407 of 2014


HC-KAR




BAGALKOT IN MVC NO.681/2010 AND SUITABLY MODIFY/
ENHANCE THE SAME, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND
EQUITY.

     THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL, HAVING BEEN
HEARD AND RESERVED ON 23.10.2025, COMING ON FOR
'PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT', THIS DAY, THE COURT
PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING:

                       CAV JUDGMENT

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. MURALIDHARA PAI)

This is an appeal filed by the Claimant in MVC No.681/2010

on the file of MACT No-IV, Bagalkot (for short, 'the tribunal')

praying to modify the judgment and award dated 05.10.2013

passed therein and to suitably enhance the compensation

amount.

2. The Claimant has maintained the claim petition before

the tribunal under Section 166 of M.V. Act praying for a total

compensation of Rs.37,00,000/- for the injuries sustained in a

road traffic accident occurred on 18.01.2010 at about 6.00 a.m.

near Tulasigeri village on Bagalkot to Belagavi State Highway.

The tribunal allowed the said petition in part holding that the

Claimant is entitled for compensation of Rs.4,39,180/- together

with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of

NC: 2025:KHC-D:15106

HC-KAR

petition till its realization. In this appeal, the Claimant has

restricted his claim to Rs.14,90,000/-.

3. As already pointed out, the Claimant has maintained this

appeal praying for enhancement of the compensation amount on

the ground that learned tribunal has awarded meager

compensation under the head of pain and suffering, loss of

income during the period of treatment, loss of future income and

other conventional heads. He has also contended that learned

tribunal has failed to award suitable rate of interest by taking

into consideration the decision rendered by Hon'ble Supreme

Court of India in Vimal Kanvar Vs Kishore Dan (2013) ACJ

1441.

4. The learned tribunal has awarded compensation to

the Claimant herein under the following heads :

1 Pain and suffering Rs.50,000/-

2 Loss of future earning capacity Rs.1,29,600/- 3 Attendant charges Rs.5,000/-

4 Medical expenses Rs.1,84,580/-

5 Conveyance charges Rs.20,000/-

6 Loss of future prospects Rs.50,000/-

                                        Total      Rs.4,39,180/-

                                          NC: 2025:KHC-D:15106



HC-KAR

5. As per the Wound Certificate marked at Ex.P7, the

Claimant herein had suffered contusion over left forehead. The

medical record produced at Ex.P16 goes to show that he has

undergone treatment at KLES Hospital, Belagavi as an in-patient

from 22.01.2010 to 06.03.2010 in connection with diffuse axonal

injury with fracture of fibular. Taking into consideration the

materials available on record learned tribunal has awarded

compensation of Rs.50,000/- to the Claimant under pain and

suffering, which is a just and reasonable compensation.

6. The tribunal has awarded compensation of

Rs.1,84,580/- to the Claimant under the head of medical

expenses. It has awarded the said amount by taking into

consideration the documents produced by the Claimant before it

at Ex.P8. The Claimant has failed to point out any error

committed by learned tribunal in awarding compensation under

this head.

7. It is the case of the Claimant that he was aged 20 years

at the time of accident and that he has suffered 48% of

permanent disability on account of accidental injuries. He has

submitted that learned tribunal has taken his functional disability

NC: 2025:KHC-D:15106

HC-KAR

at 20% and annual income as Rs.36,000/-, which is on lower

side.

8. It is true that PW-5 Dr.Praful during his evidence has

stated that the Claimant has got 30% less sensory in the left

part of entire body and thereby he has got 48% permanent

disability on left side of the body. Normally, 1/3rd of permanent

disability to a particular limb or part of body would be taken as

percentage of functional disability to whole body. In that event,

1/3rd of 48% would be 16%. Whereas, learned tribunal has taken

functional disability of the Claimant as 20%, which is more than

the percentage of functional disability taken in normal course.

9. Admittedly, as per the chart prepared by HCLSC for the

purpose of Lok-Adalat, the notional income of a person would be

taken as Rs.5,500/- per month, for the year 2010. It is the

definite case of the Claimant that he was a student at the time of

accident. As such, it would be proper to determine the quantum

of compensation under the head of loss of future income based

on his notional income. If we take the notional income of the

Claimant at Rs.5,500/- per month, with reference to date of

accident i.e., 18.01.2010, as given in the chart of HCLSC, then

NC: 2025:KHC-D:15106

HC-KAR

the compensation under the head of loss of future income/loss of

future earning capacity works out to Rs.2,37,600/- (Rs.5,500/- X

12 X 18 X 20%). In view of the same, this Court holds that it

would be proper to award a sum of Rs.2,37,600/- to the

Claimant under the head of loss of future income/loss of future

earning capacity in place of Rs.1,29,600/- as determined by the

tribunal.

10. The impugned judgment goes to show that the tribunal

has awarded a sum of Rs.5,000/- under the head of attendant

charges and Rs.20,000/- under the head of conveyance charges.

The Claimant is said to be the resident of Bagalkot. The

document produced at Ex.P16 goes to show that he has

undergone treatment in KLES Hospital, Belagavi as an in-patient

from 22.01.2010 to 06.03.2010. It is the case of the Claimant

that even thereafter he had undergone further treatment for the

injuries sustained in the accident for some more period. He

materials available on record support the said contention of the

Claimant. Thus, taking into consideration the period of treatment

of the Claimant as an in-patient and probable expenses incurred

for conveyance and attendant charges as well as diet and

NC: 2025:KHC-D:15106

HC-KAR

nourishment, this Court holds that it would be just and proper to

award a sum of Rs.50,000/- to the Claimant under this head.

11. It is contended that at the time of accident the

Claimant was studying Diploma in Textile Engineering and due to

accidental injuries he could not pursue his studies and thereby

lost good prospects in life. In the said circumstances, it is

contended that learned tribunal ought to have awarded more

compensation to the Claimant under the head of loss of future

prospects in place of Rs.50,000/- awarded under impugned

judgment. It is to be noted that in the claim petition the claimant

had contended that due to accidental injuries he has suffered

mental shock and become unsound mind. How PW-5 Dr.Praful

has not whispered anything about these aspects except stating

about certain percentage of permanent disability to the left side

body of the Claimant. In view of the same, considering the

material available on record, this Court holds that the

compensation awarded by the learned tribunal to the Claimant

under the head of loss of future prospects is proper.

12. The Claimant has also contended that the rate of

interest awarded by the tribunal in the case is meager. Normally,

NC: 2025:KHC-D:15106

HC-KAR

the interest on the compensation amount would be awarded at

the rate of 6% per annum unless there is other a circumstance

or reason for awarding higher rate of interest. The tribunal has

awarded interest to the Claimant at the rate of 6% per annum. If

we take into consideration the date of accident and other

relevant factors, this Court does not find any valid reason to hold

that rate of interest awarded by the tribunal is meager.

13. For the foregoing reasons, this Court holds that the

Claimant is entitled for total compensation of Rs.5,72,180/- in

place of Rs.4,39,180/- awarded by the tribunal, under the

following heads:

1 Pain and suffering Rs.50,000/-

2 Loss of future earning capacity Rs.2,37,600/- 3 Medical expenses Rs.1,84,580/-

4 Diet and nourishment, Rs.50,000/-

conveyance and attendant charges.

5 Loss of future prospects Rs.50,000/-

Total Rs.5,72,180/-

14. In the result, this Court proceeds to pass the following:

ORDER

(i) The appeal is allowed in part.

NC: 2025:KHC-D:15106

HC-KAR

(ii) The impugned judgment and award dated 05.10.2013 passed in MVC No.681/2010 by the Member MACT No.IV, Bagalkot is modified to the extent that the Claimant is entitled for total compensation of Rs.5,72,180/- (Rupees Five Lakh Seventy Two Thousand One Hundred and Eighty) Only as against Rs.4,39,180/- awarded by the tribunal.

(iii) The enhanced compensation shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of payment/realization.

(iv) Respondent No.2-Sriram General Insurance Company Limited shall deposit the enhanced compensation amount with accrued interest before the concerned tribunal within a period of six weeks from today.

(v) On such deposit, same shall be released in favour of the Claimant/appellant.

(vi) Draw modified award accordingly.

Sd/-

(B. MURALIDHARA PAI) JUDGE

CKK /CT-AN