[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Umeshappa S/O. Rejappa Lamani vs Annappa S/O Nagarajappa Megalageri on 23 January, 2026
-1-
MFA No.103877 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.103877 OF 2017 (MV)
BETWEEN:
UMESHAPPA
S/O. TEJAPPA LAMANI
@ PUMAPPA TEJAPPA LAMANI
S/O. TEJAPPA,
AGE: 47 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE,
R/O. GOVIND EXTENSION, TANDA,
RANEBENNUR, TQ: HAVERI.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. VISHWANATH L. HEGDE, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. M.H. PATIL, ADVOCATE AND
SRI. HARSHAWARDHAN M. PATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
MOHANKUMAR
B SHELAR
1. ANNAPPA
Digitally signed by
MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR
Location: High Court of
Karnataka, Dharwad Bench
S/O NAGARAJAPPA MEGALAGERI
Date: 2026.01.27 16:48:09
+0530
AGE: 27 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE,
R/O. GOVIND EXTN., TANDA,
RANEBENNUR, DIST: HAVERI.
2. NAGARAJ MEGALAGERI
S/O BASAPPA
AGE: MAJOR,
OCC: OWNER OF M/C
BEARING NO.KA 17/TZ-2898,
R/O. VADERAYANAHALLI,
TQ: RANEBENNUR, DIST: HAVERI.
-2-
MFA No.103877 of 2017
3. THE MANAGER,
NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
OPP: BAPUJI DENTAL COLLEGE DAVANAGERE.
(INSURER OF MOTOR BIKE NO.KA 17/TZ-2898)
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. PRUTHVI K.S., ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI. G.N. RAICHUR, ADVOCATE FOR R3;
NOTICE TO R2-SERVED)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE
MOTOR VEHICLES ACT 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND
AWARD DATED 07.09.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.757/2013 ON
THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND
ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL,
RANEBENNUR, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR
COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF
COMPENSATION & ETC.
THIS MFA HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR
JUDGMENT ON 07.01.2026 AND COMING ON FOR
PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED
THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO
-3-
MFA No.103877 of 2017
CAV JUDGMENT
The appellant/claimant has preferred this appeal under
Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988,('the
M.V.Act' for short) challenging the award of compensation
made by the Addl. Senior Civil Judge & AMACT, Ranebennur
(hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal' for short), in
M.V.C. No.757/2013 dated 07.09.2015.
2. The brief facts leading to the filing of this appeal
are that:-
On 06.03.2013 at about 9:30 p.m., the appellant while
walking on NH-4 road near Makanur Cross with his son, was
hit by a Hero Honda Splendor Pro motorcycle bearing
No.KA-17/TZ-2898, which was being driven in a rash and
negligent manner. The appellant sustained grievous
injuries, including multiple lacerations, comminuted fracture
of left tibia and fibula, and stiffness of knee and ankle
joints. The appellant was initially treated at Government
Hospital, Harihar, and subsequently admitted as an
inpatient at Bapuji Hospital, Davanagere, for a period of
about two months. Medical expenses of Rs.40,000/- were
incurred, and the appellant continues to require follow-up
treatment. The appellant is the sole breadwinner of the
family and hence, preferred a claim petition before the Addl.
Senior Civil Judge & AMACT, Ranebennur seeking
compensation. The Tribunal, by its award dated
07.09.2015, granted a total compensation of Rs.1,57,892/-,
which the appellant contends is grossly inadequate
considering the injuries sustained, loss of income,
permanent disability, and other heads of damages.
Aggrieved by the judgment and award passed by the
Tribunal, the appellant has filed the present appeal seeking
enhancement of compensation.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that
the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is neither
sound nor sustainable in law and that the compensation
awarded is wholly inadequate. It is submitted that the
award is contrary to the facts and circumstances of the case
and therefore calls for modification by this Court.
4. It is further contended that the Tribunal has
failed to properly appreciate the nature of injuries sustained
by the appellant and the prolonged treatment undergone by
him, including hospitalization for nearly two months, while
determining the compensation.
5. The learned counsel submitted that the appellant
sustained multiple grievous injuries, including head injuries,
injuries to the lower limbs, deformity of the left ankle, and
chest pain. Despite the seriousness of these injuries, the
Tribunal awarded only Rs.35,000/- towards pain and
suffering, which is stated to be on the lower side and
requires enhancement. It is also contended that though the
medical evidence assessed permanent disability at 40%, the
Tribunal restricted the same to 10% without assigning
adequate reasons, resulting in an unjust award towards loss
of future income.
6. The learned counsel further submitted that the
compensation awarded under various other heads such as
loss of income during the laid-up period, loss of amenities
and enjoyment of life, medical expenses, and conveyance,
diet, nourishment, and attendant charges is inadequate and
not in accordance with settled principles of law, and
therefore warrants enhancement.
7. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company
contended that the Tribunal's award is just and proper and
does not warrant any interference.
8. On careful consideration of the pleadings, oral
and documentary evidence on record, and the submissions
made on behalf of the parties, it is evident that the accident
occurred due to the rash and negligent riding of the
offending motorcycle. The finding recorded by the Tribunal
on negligence and liability does not call for interference. The
delay in lodging the FIR is satisfactorily explained, as the
appellant was immediately shifted to the hospital and was
under treatment. The contention regarding absence of a
valid driving licence is not supported by any cogent
evidence. For the purpose of reassessment, the notional
monthly income of the appellant is taken at Rs.7,000/-, in
terms of the guidelines issued by the Karnataka State Legal
Services Authority for accidents of the year 2013.
9. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.4,000/-
towards conveyance, diet, extra nourishment, and
attendant charges. The records disclose that the appellant
was hospitalized and under treatment for nearly two
months and would have required assistance for food,
mobility, and personal care. He would also have incurred
conveyance expenses for follow-up treatment. Having
regard to the nature of injuries and duration of treatment,
the compensation awarded under this head is inadequate
and is enhanced to Rs.10,000/-.
10. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.5,000/-
towards loss of amenities and enjoyment of life. The
medical evidence indicates stiffness of the knee and ankle
joints, muscle wasting, and restriction of movement, which
would adversely affect the appellant's ability to lead a
normal life. The amount awarded under this head is on the
lower side. Considering the nature of injuries and the
circumstances of the case, a sum of Rs.30,000/- is just
and reasonable and is accordingly awarded in place of
Rs.5,000/-.
11. With respect to the loss of income during the
laid-up period, the Tribunal has awarded only a sum of
Rs.6,000/-. The evidence on record clearly shows that the
appellant was hospitalized for nearly one month for
treatment, and he would not have been in a position to
attend to his work during the said period as well as the
subsequent follow-up treatment. Hence, a period of two
months is required to be considered. Taking the notional
income at Rs.7,000/- per month, the appellant is entitled to
a sum of Rs.14,000/- under this head.
12. Insofar as loss of future earning capacity is
concerned, the Tribunal has assessed permanent disability
at 10%, which appears to be reasonable in the facts and
circumstances of the case. However, the income adopted by
the Tribunal requires correction. Taking the monthly income
at Rs.7,000/-, the annual income comes to Rs.84,000/-.
Applying 10% disability and the multiplier of 14, having
regard to the age of the appellant at 45 years, the
compensation under this head is reassessed at
Rs.1,17,600/- in place of Rs.75,600/-.
13. The compensation awarded towards pain and
suffering and medical expenses is just and reasonable and
does not warrant interference.
14. Accordingly, compensation is reassessed as
under:
Tribunal Enhanced
Head of Compensation
Award (Rs.) Award (Rs.)
Pain and Suffering 35,000 35,000
Medical Expenses 32,292 32,292
Conveyance, Diet, Extra
Nourishment, Attendant 4,000 10,000
Charges
Loss of Income during Laid-
6,000 14,000
up Period
Loss of Future Earning
75,600 1,17,600
Capacity
Loss of Amenities and
5,000 30,000
Enjoyment of Life
Total 1,57,892 2,38,892
15. In the result, I proceed to pass the following:
- 10 -
ORDER
(i) Appeal is allowed in part.
(ii) The respondent Insurance Company is directed
to pay the enhanced compensation of
Rs.2,38,892/- to the appellant, along with
interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the
date of filing of the petition till its realization.
(iii) The Insurance Company shall deposit the
award amount within a period of eight weeks
from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
(iv) The appellant is not entitled to any interest for
the period of delay of 671 days in filing this
appeal, which is waived as per the order dated
20.07.2021.
(v) No costs.
Sd/-
(DR. K.MANMADHA RAO)
JUDGE
Rsh / CT:VP
