Sri. Puneeth a. S. Vs Sri. Sathish Rao — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2025)

Sri. Puneeth a. S. Vs Sri. Sathish Rao — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Global compensation of Rs.50,000/- (carrying no interest) in addition to the Rs.11,38,520/- awarded by the Tribunal; Respondent-Insurance Company to deposit the award amount with interest within eight weeks, failing which the appellant is entitled to interest at 6% from the date of award till realisation; decree to be drawn accordingly.

Issue for consideration

Whether the compensation of Rs.11,38,520/- awarded by the Tribunal in MVC No.776/2013 is just and adequate, warranting enhancement.

Court's answer

The Tribunal's assessment of disability at 24% to the whole body and its total award of Rs.11,38,520/- cannot be found fault with.

Ratio / Principle

Considering the nature of injuries, the pain and agony for the rest of the appellant's life, loss of amenities and discomfort, and medical and future medical expenditure, it is just and proper to award a global compensation of Rs.50,000/- in addition to what has been awarded by the Tribunal.

Key takeaways

The global compensation of Rs.50,000/- does not carry any interest.ratio¶78
The Respondent-Insurance Company shall deposit the award amount with interest within eight weeks; on failure, the appellant is entitled to interest at 6% from the date of award till its realisation.ratio¶83

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Karnataka (Division Bench: B M Shyam Prasad and G Basavaraja JJ.; judgment per G Basavaraja J.), 18-06-2025, MFA No. 7549 of 2016 (MV-I) [NC: 2025:KHC:21065-DB], under S. 173(1) MV Act against the award dated 17.03.2016 in MVC No.776/2013 (MACT, Mysuru). On 02.06.2013 a tanker (KA-19/C-4959) driven rashly and negligently hit the claimant-appellant's motorcycle (KA-09/EG0258) from behind, causing grievous injuries; he was hospitalised 02nd-17th June 2013 and underwent two major surgeries (hip joint and colostomy). The Tribunal assessed permanent disability at 24% to the whole body (PW2: 18.5%; PW3: 30%) and awarded Rs.11,38,520/- inclusive of Rs.6,41,520/- towards loss of future income and Rs.2,77,000/- towards medical expenses. Held: the Tribunal's award cannot be found fault with; however, considering the nature of injuries, lifelong pain and agony, loss of amenities, and medical and future medical expenditure, a further global compensation of Rs.50,000/- (interest-free) was awarded. Insurer to deposit the award amount with interest within eight weeks, failing which interest at 6% from the date of award till realisation. Appeal partly allowed. (The insurer's own appeal against the Tribunal award had been dismissed for non-prosecution on 16.02.2024.)

1 -

NC: 2025:KHC:21065-DB MFA No. 7549 of 2016

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD AND

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 7549 OF 2016 (MV-I)

BETWEEN:

SRI. PUNEETH A. S. S/O. LATE SHIVEGOWDA @ SHIVANNEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, R/AT HEJJODNU VILLAGE, MALLUR POST, GAVADAGERE HOBLI, HUNSUR TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT,

…APPELLANT

(BY SRI. H V BHANU PRAKASH., ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYAN N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

SRI. SATHISH RAO SINCE DEAD REPRESENTED BY HIS LRS:

1(a) SMT. H.S. PREMA, W/O LATE SATHISH RAO, MAJOR, R/AT MAHAMIYA KRUPA, NO.1-102/4 (6), SHIVASHAKTHI NAGAR, HOSABETTU, SURATHKAL, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT, KARNATAKA-575016.

THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER M/S. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,

2 -

NC: 2025:KHC:21065-DB MFA No. 7549 of 2016

HC-KAR

DIVISION OFFICE, 3^RD FLOOR, RAMASWAMY CIRCLE, MYSORE-570 005, INSURER OF TANKER LORRY, BEARING REG NO. KA-19-C-4959)

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. O MAHESH FOR R2., ADVOCATE) [CAUSE TITLE AMENDED VIDE COURT ORDER DATED:08.08.2024.]

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 17.03.2016 PASSED IN MVC NO.776/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MACT, MYSURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD and

HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA)

This appeal is by the claimant assailing the judgment and

award dated 17^th March, 2016 passed in MVC No.776 of 2013

by the Senior Civil Judge, Court of Small Causes and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mysuru (for short hereinafter referred to as the "Tribunal").

Factual matrix of the case are that, on 2^nd June, 2013, at 5:45 pm, when petitioner along with pillion Rider was

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:21065-DB MFA No. 7549 of 2016

HC-KAR

proceeding on motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-09/EG0258, one tanker bearing registration No.KA-19/C-4959 being driven in a rash and negligent manner, hit the motorcycle from the backside. Owing to the impact of which, the petitioner fell and sustained grievous injuries to his hip joint, stomach, head, face, right shoulder, chest, and other parts of the body. Immediately, he was shifted to Hospital at Mysuru wherein he was admitted as an in-patient for a period of fifteen days from 02^nd to 17^th June 2013 wherein he underwent two major surgeries to his hip joint and colostomy and thereafter, he is continuously taking treatment as an outpatient. Petitioner spent Rs.3,00,000/- towards medical expenses. For the injuries suffered in the road traffic accident, Petitioner filed claim petition before the Tribunal in MVC No.776 of 2013. The Tribunal, by its judgment dated 17^th March 2016, awarded compensation of Rs.11,38,520/-. Not being satisfied with the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, petitioner is before this Court in this appeal seeking enhancement in compensation.

4 -

NC: 2025:KHC:21065-DB MFA No. 7549 of 2016

HC-KAR

Heard Sri H.V. Bhanuprakash, learned Counsel for

the appellant and Sri O Mahesh, learned Counsel for the respondent-Insurance Company.

Learned Counsel for the appellant-claimant would submit that as on the date of the accident, the claimant aged 22 years, was a diploma student he was working as a Trainee in Larsen & Toubro factory and after completion of two years, he was appointed as Supervisor and was getting a salary of Rs.15,000/- per month. Due to the injuries sustained in the accident, the appellant has undergone several surgeries and implants were inserted; he is not in a position to work and is finding it difficult to manage with his day-to-day chores. Learned Counsel would further submit that the Doctors PW2 and PW3, who are Orthopedic and Laparoscopic Surgeons respectively who treated the appellant, have spoken about the treatment and disability of the injured. As per PW2, the appellant has suffered permanent disability at 18% in respect of lower limb, and as per the evidence of PW3, the appellant

has suffered disability at 30% and hence the injured has suffered permanent disability of 48% to the whole body.

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:21065-DB MFA No. 7549 of 2016

HC-KAR

Assessing the disability of the appellant at 24% to the whole body, the Tribunal has awarded a meagre compensation of Rs.6,41,520/-. He would further submit that the Tribunal has also not awarded just compensation under other heads and hence sought for enhancement of compensation.

On the other hand, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent-insurance company would submit that compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the higher side and hence sought for dismissal of the appeal.

We have given our anxious consideration to the submission advanced by the learned counsel for the parties. Accident is not in dispute and the injured sustaining injuries is also not in dispute. On examination of materials placed before us, it is clear that the applicant has sustained the following injuries:

i) Multiple abrasion all over the body;

ii) Lacerated wound over the right iliac region;

iii) Pain over the right hip movements of right hip, painful.

PW2-Dr. Girish Chandra R., has stated that X-ray

shows fracture of posterior wall of right acetabulum and further

6 -

NC: 2025:KHC:21065-DB MFA No. 7549 of 2016

HC-KAR

he has stated that the injured was operated on 3^rd June 2013 and fracture was fixed with plate and screws and the injured was discharged on 17^th June 2013. He has further stated that the injured complained inability to squat and climb stairs, and there is restriction of movements of right hip and loss of muscle strength. He has stated that the injured has suffered disability of 18.5% to the whole body.

PW3-Dr. B.N. Jayanth, Laparoscopic Surgeon in

BGS Apollo Hospital, has deposed that he has treated the injured on 2^nd June 2013, and he has noticed pain in abdomen and on the right lower limb, and the injured was diagnosed as polytraumatic with following injuries:

i) Hip joint communited, displaced fracture, right iliac bone, and fracture of saeralala;

ii) Upgraded contusion, 5×3 cm over the right frontal region;

iii) Graded abrasion over the outer aspect of the right four or measuring 12×3 cm involving the hand;

7 -

NC: 2025:KHC:21065-DB MFA No. 7549 of 2016

HC-KAR

iv) Operation 5×5 cm present over the front of right

knee;

v) Lacerated wound, 3×1 cm cavity depth present over iliac crest u/S Abdomen- Liver contusion 2.7×2.5 cm bleeding present in right iliac fossa.

The oral evidence of PWs2 and 3 are supported by medical records. Considering the evidence placed by the claimant, the Tribunal has assessed the disability of the injured in an extent of 24% to the whole body. Taking into consideration the oral and documentary evidence placed before it, the Tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs.6,41,520/towards loss of future income. The Tribunal has also awarded Rs.2,77,000/- towards medical expenses. It has also awarded compensation towards future medical expenses and marriage prospects, Pain, shock and suffering as also towards loss of amenities of life and happiness and frustration, and in all, awarded the total compensation of Rs.11,38,520/-. The same cannot be found fault with. Further, it is also to be noted here that as against the judgment and award of the Tribunal, the Respondent-Insurance company has also preferred appeal and

8 -

NC: 2025:KHC:21065-DB MFA No. 7549 of 2016

HC-KAR

the same was dismissed for non-prosecution vide order dated 16^th February, 2024.

Be that as it may, considering the nature of injuries

sustained by the applicant, the pain and agony to be undergone by the appellant for the rest of his life, loss of amenities and discomfort, so also, the medical expenditure and future medical expenses to be incurred, we are of the view that it is just and proper to award a global compensation of Rs.50,000/- in addition to what has been awarded by the Tribunal. Accordingly, we proceed to pass the following:

O R D E R

(i) Appeal is partly allowed;

(ii) Appellan t is entitled for a global compensation of Rs.50,000/- in addition to the amount of Rs.11,38,520/- awarded by the Tribunal;

(iii) It is made clear that the global compensation does not carry any interest;

(iv) Respondent-Insurance Company shall deposit the award amount with interest within eight weeks from today, failing, which, the appellant

9 -

NC: 2025:KHC:21065-DB MFA No. 7549 of 2016

HC-KAR

is entitled for interest at 6% from the date of award till its realisation;

(v) Draw Decree accordingly.

Sd/(B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE

Sd/(G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE

lnn List No.: 1 Sl No.: 43