Mr Venkatesh Rao Vs Sri. Rafiq

¶1

1 - NC: 2025:KHC:34976 MFA No. 9981 of 2018

¶2

HC-KAR

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 4^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 9981 OF 2018 (MV-I)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

MR VENKATESH RAO, S/O R KRISHNARAO, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/AT # ANUGRATH, KOLEDADI, NEAR SAI MANDIR, ATHIKARIBETTU VILLAGE, MULKY, MANGALURU TALUK - 575 001.

¶9

…APPELLANT

¶10

(BY SMT.HALEEMA AMEEN., ADVOCATE FOR SRI.ASHOK KUMAR SHETTY., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by KAVYA R Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶13

SRI. RAFIQ, S/O UNHIBEARY, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, BUSINESSMAN, R/AT D.NO.3-166, KEMRAL POST, PAKSHIKERE, MANGALURU TALUK - 671 541.

¶14

THE BRANCH MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD., SHREE VITAL MAIN ROAD, SURATHKAL, MANGALURU - 575 001.

¶15

…RESPONDENTS

¶16

(BY SRI.T.MOHAN KUMAR., ADVOCATE FOR R-2(ABSENT))

¶17

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:34976 MFA No. 9981 of 2018

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 02.07.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.1219/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER-MACT AND I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MANGALURU, DAKSHINA KANNADA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶20

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

¶21

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶22

This appeal is filed by the appellant/claimant under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 challenging the judgment and award dated 02.07.2018 passed in MVC No.1219/2017, by the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Mangaluru, Dakshina Kannada District, for enhancing the compensation.

¶23

Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for

¶24

the appellant and learned counsel for respondent No.2Insurance Company is absent. Notice to respondent No.1 is dispensed with.

¶25

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:34976 MFA No. 9981 of 2018

¶26

HC-KAR

¶27

The petitioner/injured claimant had filed petition

¶28

before the Tribunal for compensation of Rs.20,00,000/-. The Trial Court considering the entire evidence on record granted an amount of Rs.6,60,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a., from the date of filing the petition till the date of realisation. Aggrieved by the said order, this appeal is filed.

¶29

Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the appellant was cook aged about 52 years. Petitioner/injured claimant sustained 10 injuries as detailed in the wound certificate in Ex.P.5. Out of which, 2 are fractures and grievous injuries. He was hospitalized for 198 days as an inpatient and also, later he took treatment as an outpatient. They filed disability certificate in which permanent disability was assessed as 55%. He has difficulty in walking, running, climbing stairs, driving vehicle, rising from chair, offering prayers and squatting. But the compensation granted is very meager, therefore requested for enhancement.

¶30

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:34976 MFA No. 9981 of 2018

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

Perused the wound certificate and the injuries

¶33

sustained by him. Considering the nature of the injuries, period of hospitalization and also evidence of PW2, this court finds it reasonable to take the disability as 18% i.e., 1/3^rd of 55% instead of 10%. It is stated that petitioner was a cook and earning a sum of Rs.15,000/- to Rs.20,000/- per month, but no evidence is adduced to prove his income, as he met with an accident on 11.01.2017. This Court finds it reasonable to take his notional income as Rs.11,000/- per month, as per the guidelines issued by Karnataka State Legal Services Authority and his age is shown in the wound certificate as 52 years and the petitioner/injured claimant is also entitled for 10% towards his future prospects, that is (Rs.11,000 x 10 % = Rs.1,100/- )

¶34

Therefore, Rs.11,000 + 1100 x 12 x 11 x 18 % = Rs.2,87,496/-) is granted towards loss of future income due to disability. This Court finds that there is no dispute regarding the medical expenses granted to the

¶35

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:34976 MFA No. 9981 of 2018

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

extent of an amount of Rs.3,25,000/- and the amount granted towards pain and suffering is Rs.80,000/- and loss of amenities is Rs.50,000/-. Based on the records, he was hospitalized for more than 200 days, therefore, this Court finds it reasonable to grant towards attendance

¶38

charges is Rs.1,00,000/- (100 x 200) and conveyance charges is Rs.25,000/- and for extra nourishment is Rs.25,000/- . He might not have worked at least for a period of 10 months due to the injuries sustained by him. Therefore, this Court also finds it reasonable to grant towards loss of income during treatment period is Rs.1,10,000/- (11,000 x 10 months). Considering the nature of injuries and hospitalization, this Court also finds it reasonable to grant towards future medical expenses is Rs.30,000/- .

¶39

Thus in all, components awarded by this Court are as below:

¶40

6 -

¶41

NC: 2025:KHC:34976 MFA No. 9981 of 2018

¶42

HC-KAR

¶43

Particulars	Amount in Rs.
Loss of future income	2,87,496.00
Medical expenses	3,25,000.00
Pain and suffering	80,000.00
Loss of amenities	50,000.00
Attendance charges	1,00,000.00
Conveyance and extra	50,000.00
nourishment charges
Loss of amenities	1,10,000.00
Future medical expenses	30,000.00
Total	10,32,496.00

¶44

In the result, the following order is passed:

¶45

ORDER

¶46

i. Appeal is allowed .

¶47

ii. The judgment and award dated 02.07.2018 passed in MVC No.1219/2017, by I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Mangaluru, Dakshina Kannada District, is modified;

¶48

7 -

¶49

NC: 2025:KHC:34976 MFA No. 9981 of 2018

¶50

HC-KAR

¶51

iii. The claimant is entitled to a sum of

¶52

Rs. 10,32,496 /- along with an interest at 6% p.a as from the date of petition till the date of realization, instead of Rs.6,60,000/granted by the tribunal.

¶53

iv. Respondent No.2 is directed to deposit the amount within one month from the date of this order on such deposit and

¶54

v. Petitioner is permitted to withdraw the

¶55

entire amount along with interest accrued on the same.

¶56

Sd/(P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE

¶57

KVR

¶58

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 39

Mr Venkatesh Rao v. Sri. Rafiq

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr Venkatesh Rao v. Sri. Rafiq

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

Mr.Jagadish Vs Mr.K.M.Aboobakkar

Divisional Manager Vs Smt Jalaja Naika

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs Smt Subbalakshmamma

Ummer Donna Vs Faruq Mohammed Gangoli

Basavanna Vs G N Chandrashekara

The Branch Manager Vs N K Girish