Sri Manju @ M Manjappa Vs Sri Sunil Naik

¶1

1 -

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:34272 MFA No. 5367 of 2016

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2^ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 5367/2016 (MV-I)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI MANJU @ M MANJAPPA, S/O HANUMANTAPPA, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, R/O MANGENAHALLI VILLAGE, MEDIGERE POST, SANTHEBENNUR HOBLI, CHENNAGIRI TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT – 577 557.

¶9

…APPELLANT

¶10

(BY SRI. HEMANTH T.C., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. M R HIREMATHAD., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by PADMASHREE SHEKHAR DESAI

¶13

Location: High Court Of Karnatka

¶14

SRI SUNIL NAIK S/O BHOJA NAIK, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, DRIVER OF THOOFAN TRAX BEARING REG NO KA-7/B-2196,

¶15

R/O MACHIHALLI THANDA, MACHIHALLI POST, HARAPANAHALLI TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT – 583 138.

¶16

SRI GANESH NAIK S/O KARIYANAIK, MAJOR, OWNER OF THOOFAN TRAX BEARING REG NO KA-7/B-2196, R/O MACHIHALLI POST, HARAPANAHALLI TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT – 583 138.

¶17

2 -

¶18

NC: 2025:KHC:34272 MFA No. 5367 of 2016

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

THE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., DIVISION OFFICE : 34/3 M M K COMPLEX, AKKAMAHADEVI ROAD, P J EXTENSION DAVANGERE – 577 002.

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SRI. B.M. SIDDAPPA., ADVOCATE FOR R2, SRI. M.U. POONACHA, ADVOCATE FOR R3, R1 SERVED)

¶23

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:22.8.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.120/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, AMACT, CHANNAGIRI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶24

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA

¶25

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶26

This MFA is filed by the appellant/petitioner against the award and judgment passed by the Tribunal dated 22.08.2015 in MVC No.120/2012 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, AMACT, Channagiri.

¶27

Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant. Learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2 remained absent. The ranks of the parties are retained as per tribunal for the sake of convenience.

¶28

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:34272 MFA No. 5367 of 2016

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

The petitioner/injured claimant had filed petition before the tribunal for compensation of Rs.12,00,000/- with interest at the rate of 12% p.a. The tribunal considering the entire evidence on record granted an amount of Rs.8,92,000/- with interest at the rate of 9% p.a., from the date of filing the petition till the date of realisation. Aggrieved by the said order, this appeal is filed.

¶31

Learned counsel for the appellant mainly contended that the petitioner met with an accident on 23.05.2012 who was working as an coolie and earning Rs.8,000/-, but he has not adduced any evidence regarding income. Therefore, the Tribunal has taken the income as Rs.6,000/- per month. As per the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority guidelines, as he met with an accident in the year 2012, the income is to be taken as Rs.7,000/- per month instead of Rs.6,000. Therefore, this Court finds it reasonable to calculate salary as Rs.7,000/-. Hence, loss of future income =Rs.7000 x 12 x ½ x 17 = Rs. 7,14,000 /- and the amount granted under the other heads stands good.

¶32

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:34272 MFA No. 5367 of 2016

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

Thus in all, total compensation awarded by this

¶35

court are as below,

¶36

Particulars Amount
in Rs.
Towards Loss of future 7,14,000
income
Towards Medical expenses 2,40,000
and attendant charges
Towards pain and 20,000
suffering
Towards loss of amenities 20,000
of life
Total 9,94,000

¶37

Hence, the appellant-claimant is entitled for a total enhanced compensation of Rs.9,94,000/- along with

¶38

interest at the rate of 9% p.a.

¶39

In the result, the following order is passed:

¶40

ORDER

¶41

i. Appeal is allowed in part.

¶42

ii. The judgment and award dated 22.08.2015 passed in MVC No.120/2012 on the file of the

¶43

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:34272 MFA No. 5367 of 2016

¶44

HC-KAR

¶45

Senior Civil Judge, AMACT, Channagiri, is modified;

¶46

iii. The claimant is entitled to a sum of Rs. 9,94,000 /- along with interest at 9% p.a from the date of petition till the date of realization, instead of Rs.8,92,000/- granted by the tribunal.

¶47

iv. Respondent No.3/Insurance company is directed to deposit the amount within one month from the date of this order;

¶48

v. On such deposit, appellant is permitted to withdraw the entire amount along with interest accrued on the same.

¶49

Sd/(P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE

¶50

AKV

¶51

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 49

Sri Manju @ M Manjappa v. Sri Sunil Naik

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Manju @ M Manjappa v. Sri Sunil Naik

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

Subhash Vs K.G. Kumar

The United India Insurance Co. Limited Vs Sri Manjunath C

Devegowda Vs H L Suvarna

Regional Manager, Vs Sri. Shivanna

Sri Ramakrishna Vs the National Insurance Co. Ltd.

H K Ravi Vs Kempegowda