Partly allowed¶68

Shashanka v. Nagaraju P

Karnataka HC12 Mar 2025MFA/1939/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka HC (Justice Pradeep Singh Yerur, 12.03.2025), MFA No.1939/2024 (MV-I): Shashanka v. Nagaraju P & Manager, Edelweiss General Insurance (Zuno) - enhancement of MVC compensation from Rs.5,57,820 to Rs.7,10,360 with 6% interest; notional income raised to Rs.15,500/month (LSA chart, 2022); multiplier 18 and 7% whole-body disability retained; insurer to pay enhanced amount within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Appeal allowed-in-part; impugned judgment and award dated 14.02.2024 in MVC No.1412/2022 modified; total compensation enhanced to Rs.7,10,360/- (from Rs.5,57,820/-) with interest at 6% per annum; enhanced amount payable by respondent No.2-Insurance Company within four weeks; release by electronic transfer upon furnishing bank details/proper identification; all other tribunal terms and conditions to stand intact.

Shashanka Vs Nagaraju P — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶68

Issue for consideration

Whether the compensation awarded by the tribunal in MVC No.1412/2022 was inadequate and meagre, requiring enhancement. +1 more

¶21

Court's answer

For the claimant aged 25 years on the date of the accident, the appropriate multiplier is '18'; the tribunal's application of it is correct and does not call for interference.

¶46

Ratio / Principle

Occurrence of the accident, involvement of the vehicle and injuries sustained by the claimant are proved and established by Exs.P1 to P53; negligence stands attributed against the driver of the offending car and was not questioned or challenged.

¶43

Key takeaways

Doctors examined as CWs.1 and 2 deposed disability of 23.3% to a particular limb; the tribunal's adoption of 1/3rd thereof, i.e. 7% to the whole body, is retained and does not call for interference.ratio¶46
The tribunal's assessment of income at Rs.11,000/- p.m. is on the lower side; per the notional income chart of the Legal Services Authority prescribing Rs.15,500/- per month for accidents of the year 2022, income is taken at Rs.15,500/- per month.ratio¶46
Loss of future income due to permanent disability is computed at Rs.2,34,360/- (Rs.15,500/- x 12 x 18 x 7%), as against Rs.1,66,320/- awarded by the tribunal.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Enhancement of motor accident compensation (MFA No.1939/2024, MV-I, decided 12.03.2025). Claimant, a rider on a Royal Enfield motorcycle (KA-13/ER-5177), was injured on 10.03.2022 when the driver of a Mahindra Xylo (KA-09/Z-2061) drove rashly and negligently, suddenly stopped, took reverse and dashed against the motorcycle; he underwent 20 days' inpatient treatment at Sparsh Hospital, Hassan. The Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Arakalagud awarded Rs.5,57,820/- with 6% interest. On an appeal under S.173(1) MV Act, the High Court upheld the tribunal's multiplier of '18' (claimant aged 25) and its adoption of 7% whole-body disability (doctors CWs.1 and 2 having deposed 23.3% limb disability), but raised notional income from Rs.11,000/- to Rs.15,500/- per month per the Legal Services Authority notional income chart for accidents of 2022. Consequently, loss of future income was recomputed at Rs.2,34,360/- and loss of income during a three-month treatment/recuperation period at Rs.46,500/-; pain, shock and agony was enhanced to Rs.60,000/- and disappointment, discomfort and loss of amenities to Rs.40,000/-, while medical expenses (Rs.2,54,500/-), food/diet/conveyance (Rs.20,000/-), future medical expenses (Rs.30,000/-) and motorcycle repair (Rs.25,000/-) were retained. Total compensation was enhanced to Rs.7,10,360/- with interest at 6% per annum, payable by the Insurance Company within four weeks by electronic transfer; appeal allowed-in-part.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:10528 MFA No. 1939 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1939 OF 2024 (MV-I)

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

SHASHANKA S/O VASANTHA AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/AT VINAYAKA NAGARA, KOTE, ARAKALGUD TOWN, HASSAN DISTRICT

¶7

…APPELLANT

¶8

(BY SRI. SHRIPAD V SHASTRI.,ADVOCATE)

¶9

AND:

¶10

NAGARAJU P S/O PUTTASWAMYGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/AT 402, BANDIPALYA, G S ASHRAMA MYSURU WEST

¶11

Digitally signed by GAVRIBIDANUR SUBRAMANYA GUPTA SREENATH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

THE MANAGER EDELWEISS GENERAL INSURANCE (ZUNO GENERAL INSURANCE ) 5^TH FLOOR, TOWERS 3 KOHINOOR CITY MALL KIROL ROAD, KURLA (WEST) MUMBAI - 400 070

¶13

…RESPONDENTS

¶14

(BY SRI.B.PRADEEP.,ADVOCATE FOR R-2; NOTICE TO R-1 IS DISPENSED WITH V.O.D 11.03.2025)

¶15

THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.14.02.2024 PASSED IN MVC NO.1412/2022 ON THE FILE OF

¶16

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:10528 MFA No. 1939 of 2024

¶17

THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, ARAKALAGUD, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶18

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR

¶19

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶20

This appeal is preferred by the appellant-claimant

¶21

challenging the judgment and award dated 14.02.2024 passed in MVC.No.1412/2022 by the Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Arakalagud (for short ‘the tribunal’). This appeal is founded on the premise of inadequate and meager compensation awarded by the tribunal.

¶22

Though this matter is listed for admission, with

¶23

consent of learned counsels for parties, it is taken up for final disposal.

¶24

Parties to the appeal shall be referred to as per their status before the tribunal.

¶25

Brief facts of the case are as under:

¶26

On 10.03.2022, when the claimant was proceeding

¶27

as a rider on his Royal Enfield motorcycle bearing

¶28

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:10528 MFA No. 1939 of 2024

¶29

registration No.KA-13/ER-5177 on the left side of the road, the driver of Mahindra Xylo car bearing registration No.KA-09/Z-2061 drove the same in a rash and negligent manner, suddenly stopped the vehicle and took reverse direction and dashed against the motor cycle of the claimant.

¶30

4.1 Due to occurrence of accident on the negligence of the driver of the offending vehicle, the claimant sustained injuries. He was immediately shifted to Sparsh Hospital, Hassan, where he took treatment as an inpatient for 20 days and spent more than Rs.3,00,000/- toward his treatment for the injuries sustained in the road traffic accident. Due to the injuries sustained and the expenditure meted out for treatment, he filed a claim petition seeking compensation against the respondents.

¶31

4.2 Respondent No.1 did not appear before the

¶32

tribunal and was placed ex parte . Respondent No.2Insurance Company has filed written statement denying

¶33

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:10528 MFA No. 1939 of 2024

¶34

the claim of the claimant and sought for dismissal of the claim petition.

¶35

4.3 On the basis of material evidence produced by the parties, both oral and documentary, the tribunal awarded total compensation of Rs.5,57,820/- along with interest @ 6% p.a. and held that respondent Nos.1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable and directed respondent No.2-Insurance Company to pay the compensation within a period of two months.

¶36

4.4 Being aggrieved by the inadequate compensation awarded by the tribunal, the claimant is before this Court seeking enhancement.

¶37

It is the contention of learner counsel for appellant-claimant that the tribunal has erred in assessing the income at Rs.11,000/- p.m., which is on the lower side, whereas the income ought to have been taken at Rs.15,500/-. It is also contended that the compensation awarded under all other heads is meagre and the same

¶38

¶39

NC: 2025:KHC:10528 MFA No. 1939 of 2024

¶40

requires to be enhanced. Hence, he seeks to allow the appeal.

¶41

Per contra, learned counsel for Insurance

¶42

Company sustains the impugned judgment and award passed by the tribunal, which is on the basis of materials placed on record. He further contends that there is no material placed on record by the claimant with regard to proof of income. Therefore, the income taken by the tribunal so also the compensation awarded under other heads are justified. Hence, he seeks dismissal of this appeal.

¶43

I have heard learned counsel for appellantclaimant and learned counsel for respondent-Insurance Company and perused the impugned judgment and award and the records. The occurrence of accident, involvement of vehicle and injuries sustained by the claimant are proved and established by production of Exs.P1 to P53. Therefore, the negligence is attributed against the driver

¶44

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:10528 MFA No. 1939 of 2024

¶45

of the offending car, which is not questioned or challenged.

¶46

Now coming to the question of age, avocation, income, multiplier and disability for awarding compensation, it is seen that the claimant was aged 25 years as on date of occurrence of accident, the appropriate multiplier applicable is '18', which is correctly applied by the tribunal and the same does not call for interference. The Doctors have been examined as CWs.1 and 2 and they have deposed the disability to an extent of 23.3% to a particular limb. However, the tribunal has taken 1/3^rd of the same i.e. 7% to the whole body, which also does not call for interference and the same is retained. I am in agreement with learned counsel for appellant-claimant that the income assessed by the tribunal is on the lower side. The notional income chart of the Legal Services Authority prescribes the income of Rs.15,500/- per month for the accident of the year 2022. Hence, the income is taken as Rs.15,500/- per month as against Rs.11,000/-

¶47

¶48

NC: 2025:KHC:10528 MFA No. 1939 of 2024

¶49

taken by the tribunal. Therefore, the claimant is entitled to Rs.2,34,360/- (Rs.15,500/- x 12 x 18 x 7%) towards

¶50

loss of future income due to permanent disability as

¶51

against Rs.1,66,320/- awarded by the tribunal.

¶52

The tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.2,54,500/towards medical expenses, which does not call for interference and the same is retained.

¶53

The tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.30,000/towards pain, shock and agony. However, this Court deems it appropriate to award Rs.60,000/- under this head.

¶54

The tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.22,000/towards loss of income during treatment period. In view of this Court enhancing the income from Rs.11,000/- to Rs.15,500/- and the claimant would require atleast three months period to recuperate and to get back to his normal

¶55

day to day activities, he is entitled to Rs.46,500/- (Rs.15,500/- x 3) under this head.

¶56

8 - NC: 2025:KHC:10528 MFA No. 1939 of 2024

¶57

The tribunal awarded Rs.10,000/- towards disappointment, discomfort and loss of amenities. However, this Court deems it appropriate award Rs.40,000/- under this head.

¶58

The tribunal awarded Rs.20,000/- towards food, diet, attendant, nourishment, conveyance and other incidental expenses; Rs.30,000/- towards future medical expenses and Rs.25,000/- towards motorcycle repair expenses, which do not call for interference and the same are retained.

¶59

In view of the above, the claimant is entitled to total compensation of Rs.7,10,360/- as against

¶60

Rs.5,57,820/- awarded by the tribunal, as mentioned in the table below:

¶61

Sl. No.	Head of compensation	Amount of compensation awarded
1	Pain, shock and agony	60,000-00
2	Medical expenses	2,54,500-00
3	Food, diet, attendant, nourishment, conveyance and other incidental expenses	20,000-00
4	Future medical expenses	30,000-00

¶62

9 - NC: 2025:KHC:10528 MFA No. 1939 of 2024

¶63

5	Loss of income during treatment period	46,500-00
6	Loss of future income due to permanent disability	2,34,360-00
7	Disappointment, discomfort and loss of amenities	40,000-00
8	Motor cycle repair expenses	25,000-00
	TOTAL	7,10,360-00

¶64

Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶65

O R D E R

¶66

i) The appeal is allowed-in-part ;

¶67

ii) The impugned judgment and award dated 14.02.2024 passed in MVC.No.1412/2022 by the Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Arakalagud, is modified;

¶68

iii) The appellant-claimant is entitled to total compensation of Rs.7,10,360/- as against Rs.5,57,820/- awarded by the tribunal along with interest at 6% per annum.

¶69

iv) The enhanced compensation amount shall be paid by the respondent-Insurance Company within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment.

¶70

v) The compensation amount shall be released in favour of the appellant-claimant as per the terms of the tribunal by electronic transfer to the claimant upon furnishing the required bank details/upon proper identification.

¶71