Sri Nandisha Vs Seenu P K

¶1

1 -

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:41061 MFA No. 2923 of 2021

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 2923 OF 2021 (MV-I)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI. NANDISHA S/O JAVEREGOWDA AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS R/AT HEDDANAHALLI VILLAGE DUDDA HOBLI HASSAN TALUK & DISTRICT - 573 201.

¶9

…APPELLANT

¶10

(BY SRI. H.J. ANANDA, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by KORLAHALLI BHARATHIDEVIKRISHNACHARYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

SEENU P.K. S/O KHUNNIRAMAN P.K., MAJOR, R/AT PANAMKUNAL KARAYIL, KUTTUR POST, M.M. BAZAR, THALIPARAMBA, KANNURU DISTRICT, KERALA STATE - 670 306.

¶14

THE MANAGER NEW INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, PAYANURU BRANCH (760805) 10/984, A5, SOUTH BAZAR TEMPLE ROAD KERALA - 670 307.

¶15

REPRESENTED BY: MANAGER, THE NEW INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, CHANDANA COMPLEX,

¶16

2 -

¶17

NC: 2025:KHC:41061 MFA No. 2923 of 2021

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

HARSHA MAHAL ROAD, HASSAN - 573 201.

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SRI. S. KRISHNA KISHORE, ADVOCATE FOR R2, R1 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

¶22

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 20.11.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.863/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE V ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, HASSAN, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION

¶23

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA

¶24

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶25

This appeal is filed by the claimant being aggrieved

¶26

by the judgment and award dated 20^th November 2019, passed by the V Addl.District & Sessions Judge and Addl.M.A.C.T., Hassan, (for short `Tribunal'), in MVC No.863/2018, seeking enhancement of compensation.

¶27

For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Tribunal.

¶28

The brief facts of the case are that, on 30.07.2017, at about 5.30 p.m., when the claimant was

¶29

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:41061 MFA No. 2923 of 2021

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

going on motorcycle from Plathra towards Khandanthar, he met with an accident due to rash and negligent driving of autorickshaw bearing registration No.KL-13-U-1484 by its driver; as a result, he sustained crush injury to the right leg and also fracture of right femur. He has spent substantial amount towards medical expenses and he has suffered permanent disability. With these reasons, the claimant has prayed for awarding of compensation of Rs.20 lakhs.

¶32

Respondent No.1 was the owner and respondent No.2 was the insurer of the offending autorickshaw. Respondent No.1 remained ex parte before the Tribunal. Respondent No.2-insurer filed its written statement, denying the contentions of the claim petitioner and it also denied its liability to pay the compensation. With these reasons, prayed to dismiss the claim petition.

¶33

From the rival contentions of the parties, the Tribunal framed necessary issues.

¶34

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:41061 MFA No. 2923 of 2021

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

The claimant to prove his case examined two

¶37

witnesses as PW-1 and PW-2 and marked 18 documents, as per Exs.P-1 to P-18. Respondent No.2 examined one witness as RW-1 and marked three documents as Exs.R-1 to R-3.

¶38

The Tribunal after hearing both parties and appreciating the evidence on record, held that the accident occurred due to negligence of driver of the autorickshaw. It assessed the age of the claimant as

¶39

28 years at the time of the accident, his earning as Rs.8,500/- per month, functional disability at 50%, applied the multiplier as `17' and awarded following amount of

¶40

compensation:

¶41

Particulars	Amount in Rs.
Pain and sufferings	30,000/-
Medical expenses	2,35,000/-
Loss of earning during laid up period	12,000/-
Food and nourishment	5,000/-
Attendant charges	6,000/-
Conveyance	6,000/-

¶42

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:41061 MFA No. 2923 of 2021

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

Loss of future earning	8,16,000/-
Future medical expenses	25,000/-
Total	11,35,000/-

¶45

Being aggrieved by the said award passed by the

¶46

Tribunal, the claimant has filed the present appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.

¶47

8. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the claimant as well as the insurer.

¶48

9. Learned counsel for the appellant/claimant submits that the claimant had lost his right leg below the knee and even he has sustained fracture of right femur; He was aged about 28 years at the time of accident and was unmarried; Claimant was working as driver/helper of JCB and earning Rs.25,000/- per month; The Tribunal has taken his income as Rs.8,000/- per month, which is highly incorrect.

¶49

10. He further contended that, according to the evidence of the doctor - PW-2, claimant has suffered permanent disability to an extent of 75%, but the Tribunal

¶50

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:41061 MFA No. 2923 of 2021

¶51

HC-KAR

¶52

has taken disability at 50%, which is incorrect; The amount of compensation awarded under other heads are also on the lower side; No amount of compensation was awarded towards loss of amenities, marriage prospects etc., Even the Tribunal has not added future prospects while assessing the compensation under the head `loss of future earning capacity due to permanent disability'. With these reasons, prayed to enhance the compensation.

¶53

11. Learned counsel for respondent No.2-insurer supported the impugned judgment and submitted that there are no grounds to interfere in the findings of the Tribunal and prayed to dismiss the appeal.

¶54

12. Following points arise for consideration :

¶55

(ii) Whether the claimant is entitled to enhancement of compensation?

¶56

(ii) What order?

¶57

Point No.1 :

¶58

13. The fact of the accident and injuries sustained

¶59

by the claimant in the accident are not in serious dispute.

¶60

Therefore, there is no need to reconsider the same.

¶61

7 - NC: 2025:KHC:41061 MFA No. 2923 of 2021

¶62

HC-KAR

¶63

14. According to the medical records produced by the claimant, it is proved that the claimant had sustained crush injury to his right leg and his right leg below knee was amputated. He sustained fracture of right femur and he underwent surgery. It is also accepted by the Tribunal that age of the claimant was 28 years at the time of accident. The Tribunal has assessed his notional income

¶64

as Rs.8,000/- per month, as the claimant has not produced sufficient materials to prove his income as Rs.25,000/- per month. The said income is on the lower side. Following the chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, the income of the claimant is taken as Rs.11,000/- per month.

¶65

15. PW-2 - doctor has stated that claimant has suffered permanent disability at 75% to his right limb below the knee. The Tribunal following Schedule-I, Part-II of Employees Compensation Act, assessed the permanent disability at 50%. Looking at the nature of work being

¶66

8 -

¶67

NC: 2025:KHC:41061 MFA No. 2923 of 2021

¶68

HC-KAR

¶69

done by the claimant as stated in the claim petition, the said assessment does not call for any interference.

¶70

16. It is true that the Tribunal has not awarded compensation towards future prospects to the claimant. His right leg was amputated and he is suffering from permanent disability to an extent of 50%. Therefore, looking at the facts of the present case, future prospects has to be added. He was aged about 28 years. Therefore, 40% as his income shall be added towards future prospects. Undisputedly, the multiplier applicable to the case on hand is 17'. On the basis of the same, compensation under the head loss of future earning capacity due to permanent disability' has to be assessed.

¶71

17. Looking at the averments made in the claim petition, as well as materials available on record, the amount of compensation awarded under other heads are on the lower side. Claimant was admitted in this hospital for 7 days. Even after his discharge from the hospital, due

¶72

9 - NC: 2025:KHC:41061 MFA No. 2923 of 2021

¶73

HC-KAR

¶74

to the amputation of leg, someone must have attended to assist him to do day-today activities. That was not properly compensated. He might also be on the special diet during treatment. The same has not been considered by the Tribunal.

¶75

18. According to the evidence of the claimant, he was unmarried at the time of the accident and he has also stated that his marriage prospects has been seriously affected. The Tribunal has not awarded any amount of compensation under those heads.

¶76

19. PW-1 in his evidence has stated that he wanted to have an artificial limb, but, due to poverty, he was unable to purchase the artificial limb. No amount of compensation was awarded by the Tribunal. Claimant's right leg below the knee was amputated. There is possibility of use of artificial limb, therefore, some amount needs to be awarded under the said head.

¶77

20. For the aforesaid discussions, following amount

¶78

of compensation is awarded:

¶79

10 -

¶80

NC: 2025:KHC:41061 MFA No. 2923 of 2021

¶81

HC-KAR

¶82

Particulars	Amount in Rs.
Pain and sufferings	75,000/-
Medical expenses	2,35,000/-
Special diet, conveyance and attendant charges	50,000/-
Loss of income during laid up period	55,000/-
(Rs.11,000/- x 5)
Loss of future earning capacity due to disability	15,70,800/-
(Rs.11,000/- + 40% x 12 x 17x 50%)
Loss of marriage prospects	50,000/-
Future medical expenses	36,000/-
Towards artificial limb	1,00,000/-
Loss of amenities	50,000/-
Total	22,21,800/-
Amount awarded by the Tribunal Enhancement- Rounded off-	11,35,000/- 10,86,800/- *10,87,000/-*

¶83

The claimant is also entitled to interest at the rate of 6% p.a. on the enhanced amount of compensation from

¶84

the date of petition till the date of realisation, excluding

¶85

11 -

¶86

NC: 2025:KHC:41061 MFA No. 2923 of 2021

¶87

HC-KAR

¶88

the amount awarded towards future medical expenses and artificial limb.

¶89

Respondent Nos.1 and 2 are jointly and

¶90

severally liable to pay the said amount of compensation. Accordingly, point No.1 is answered partly in the affirmative.

¶91

In the result, I proceed to pass the following:

¶92

ORDER

¶93

i) The Appeal is allowed in part .

¶94

ii) The judgment and award dated 20^th November 2019, passed in MVC.No.863/2018, by the V Addl.District and Sessions Judge and Addl.M.A.C.T., Hassan, stands modified.

¶95

iii) The claimant is entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.10,87,000/-, with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. on the enhanced amount, from the date of petition till its realization, excluding the amount awarded towards future medical expenses and artificial limb.

¶96

12 -

¶97

NC: 2025:KHC:41061 MFA No. 2923 of 2021

¶98

HC-KAR

¶99

iv) The respondent No.2 - Insurance Company shall deposit the amount within a period of six weeks from the date of award.

¶100

v) Out of the enhanced amount, claimant shall deposit 50% of the amount in any Nationalised Bank of his choice, for a period of two years and remaining 50% shall be released in his favour on due identity.

¶101

vi) Draw award accordingly.

¶102

Registry is directed to send back the records along with a copy of this judgment to the concerned Tribunal.

¶103

Sd/(UMESH M ADIGA) JUDGE

¶104

bk/

¶105

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 43

Sri Nandisha v. Seenu P K

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Nandisha v. Seenu P K

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt Meenakshamma @ Maralusiddamma Vs Smt Dakshayinamma

Alexander Lasrado S/O Late Lawrence Lasrado Vs Abdul Kunhi S/O Mohammed Beary

National Insurance Company Ltd., Vs Raju H N @ Siddaraju

Smt.Sree Jyotsna @ Jyioshsna Vs G a Sudhakara

Pavan Thakare @ Pavan Narayanrao Thakare Vs P Vivekananda Shanmughanathan

Smt. K Kamaladevi Vs Mr. Chethan M N