Karnataka High Court
Shantappa vs Virupanna And Anr on 4 September, 2025
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5165
MFA No. 201510 of 2019
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO. 201510 OF 2019 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
SHANTAPPA S/O SHIVAPPA,
AGE: 41 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: CHIKKA KADASUR,
TQ: SINDHANUR,
DIST: RAICHUR,
NOW R/O: RAMPUR,
TQ: & DIST: RAICHUR.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI SHARANAGOWDA V. PATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. VIRUPANNA S/O HUCHAPPA,
Digitally signed
by RENUKA AGE: MAJOR,
Location: HIGH OCC: OWNER OF TEMPO
COURT OF TOOFAN JEEP NO.KA-36/M-9556,
KARNATAKA
R/O: H.NO.151, CHIKKA KADABUR,
TQ : SINDHANUR,
DIST: RAICHUR - 584 101.
2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
DIVISIONAL OFFICE, ANAGA COMPLEX,
NEAR CHANDRAMOUESHWAR CHOWK,
RAICHUR - 584 101.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SANJAY M. JOSHI, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH)
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5165
MFA No. 201510 of 2019
HC-KAR
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE
MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL BY
MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 21.06.2019,
PASSED BY THE II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE
AND MACT AT RAICHUR, IN MVC NO.399/2018 AND PLEASED
TO ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION OF RS.4,71,700/- TO
RS.30,75,000/- WITH 9% INTEREST IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS MFA, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR
AMARANNAVAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
Being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated
21.06.2019 passed in MVC No.399/2018 by the II-Addl.
Dist. & Sessions Judge & MACT, Raichur (hereinafter
referred to as 'the Tribunal' for short) the appellant-
claimant is before this Court seeking enhancement of
compensation.
2. Brief facts leading to filing of claim petition are
that, on 19.06.2017 at about 4:00 p.m. the claimant was
traveling in a Tempo Toofan Jeep bearing Reg.No.KA-
36/M-9556 with other villagers and the respondent No.1
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5165
HC-KAR
being the driver of said Jeep drove the same with high
speed and in a rash and negligent manner and dashed to a
electric pole and the vehicle turned turtled in the
agriculture field. Due to the said accident, the claimant
sustained grievous and multiple injuries. The injuries have
resulted in permanent partial disability and same has
affected his future earning capacity. The claimant
contended that he having suffered the injuries is entitled
for compensation from the respondents.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant-
claimant would contend that at the time of accident, the
age of the claimant was 40 years and doing agriculture
work and he was earning more than Rs.15,000/- per
month. The claimant had sustained cut lacerated wounds
over right eyebrow and forehead with suspected fracture
of left wrist, left ankle and left femur and claimant was
subjected to radiological examination and it was found
that the claimant sustained inter trochanteric fracture of
left femur and fracture of left accetabalem, fracture of
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5165
HC-KAR
distal 1/3rd of shaft of ulna, fracture of ulna styloid process
and distal end of radius, fracture of distal 1/3rd of shaft of
left fibula with soft tissue injury. He further contended
that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards
pain and suffering, loss of future income, loss of income
during laid up period and other heads are on the lower
side. He further contended that, the Doctor-PW.2 who has
issued disability certificate - Ex.P9 and has assessed
permanent partial disability at 75% to the whole body, but
the Tribunal has taken 15% only, which is on the lower
side. He further submits that the claimant being
agriculturist has affected his future earning capacity and
considering the same, the compensation awarded by the
Tribunal under all heads are on the lower side. Hence,
seeks for enhancement of compensation by allowing the
appeal.
4. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the
respondent No.2-Insurance Company contended that the
compensation awarded by the Tribunal is adequate
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5165
HC-KAR
considering the age, income and avocation of the claimant
and there is no need for any interference by this Court.
Hence, prays for dismissal of appeal.
5. Having heard learned counsels, this Court
perused the impugned judgment and the Trial Court
Records.
6. The date of the accident, age of the claimant
and liability on the Insurance Company are not in dispute.
7. The appellant-claimant has sustained three
fractures:
i) Trochanteric fracture of left femur and
fracture of left accetabalem,
ii) fracture of distal 1/3rd of shaft of ulna,
iii) fracture of ulna steroid process and
distal end of radius, fracture of distal
1/3rd of shaft of left fibula with soft
tissue injury.
8. The doctor-PW.2 while issuing disability
certificate at Ex.P9 has stated that appellant-claimant has
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5165
HC-KAR
sustained 75% disability to the whole body. Considering
the said aspect, the disability taken by the Tribunal at
15% is on the lower side, it should be taken at 30%.
9. So also income taken by the Tribunal at
Rs.7,000/- per month is on the lower side. As per the
guidelines issued by KSLSA for the purpose of settlement
of disputes before the Lok-Adalath prescribe a notional
income of Rs.10,250/- for the year 2017. Tribunal has
rightly applied multiplier at '15'. Therefore, considering
the same, the loss of future income is calculated as under:
Rs.10,250/- x 12 x 15 x 30% = Rs.5,53,500/-.
10. The claimant has sustained grievous injuries.
Considering the same, the amount awarded by the
Tribunal towards pain and suffering at Rs.60,000/- is on
the lower side and Rs.20,000/- towards loss of amenities
is also on the lower side, which needs to be enhanced to
Rs.75,000/- each.
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5165
HC-KAR
11. The Tribunal has rightly awarded a sum of
Rs.1,43,746/- towards medical expenses; Rs.15,000/-
towards food, nourishment and conveyance; Rs.10,000/-
attendant charges; and Rs.20,000/- towards future
medical expenses.
12. The claimant was admitted in the hospital and
advised for rest for more than two months. Considering
the same, he is entitled for loss of income during laid up
period for three months that is Rs.30,750/- (Rs.10,250/-
x3).
13. Thus, the claimant is entitled for following
amount of compensation:
Amount Amount
Sl.
Heads awarded by the awarded by
No
Tribunal this Court
1. Loss of future income Rs.1,89,000/- Rs.5,53,500/-
2. Pain and suffering Rs.60,000/- Rs.75,000/-
3. Medical expenses Rs.1,43,746/- Rs.1,43,746/-
4. Future medical expenses Rs.20,000/- Rs.20,000/-
5. Towards loss of amenities Rs.20,000/- Rs.75,000/-
6. Attendant charges Rs.10,000/- Rs.10,000/-
Food and nourishment; Rs.15,000/- Rs.15,000/-
7.
conveyance charges
Loss of income during Rs.14,000/- Rs.30,750/-
8.
laid up period
Total Rs.4,71,746/- Rs.9,22,996/-
(rounded off to) Rs.4,71,700/- Rs.9,23,000/-
Enhancement Rs.4,51,300/-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5165
HC-KAR
14. Since without any basis, the Tribunal has
granted interest at the rate of 8% p.a. the same is
reduced to 6% p.a.
15. In the result, the appeal deserves to be allowed
in-part. Hence, the following:
ORDER
(i) The appeal is allowed in-part.
(ii) The appellant-claimant is entitled to total
compensation of Rs.9,23,000/- against
Rs.4,71,700/- as awarded by the Tribunal
along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a.
from the date of petition till its deposit.
(iii) The respondent No.2-Insurance company is
directed to deposit the compensation
amount within a period of eight weeks
from this day, failing which, it shall carry
interest at the rate of 9% p.a. till payment.
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5165
HC-KAR
(iv) The order of deposit and release in favour
of the claimant passed by the Tribunal
remains unaltered.
(v) The Registry is directed to send back the
records along with copy of this judgment
to the concerned Court.
Sd/-
(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR)
JUDGE
SDU
CT;VK
