Sri Basavaraju S B Vs Sri. Shankaregowda K

¶1

1 -

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:18563 M.F.A. No.1912/2020

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.1912/2020 (MV-I)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SRI. BASAVARAJU S.B. S/O LATE BASAVAIAH AGED 49 YEARS SADHOLALU VILLAGE MADDUR TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT.

¶8

Digitally signed by ARSHIFA BAHAR KHANAM (BY SRI. CHETHAN D.T. ADV.,) Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AND:

¶9

…APPELLANT

¶10

SRI. SHANKAREGOWDA .K S/O KARIGOWDA MAJOR, KONASALE VILLAGE MADDUR TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT (OWNER OF SUPER SPLENDOR MOTORCYCLE BEARING REG.NO.KA-11/R-9784).

¶11

THE BRANCH MANAGER UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD M.C.ROAD, MANDYA (POLICY NO. 0720013115P104239050 VALID FROM 16-07-2015 TO 15-07-2016).

¶12

…RESPONDENTS

¶13

(BY SRI. C. SHANKAR REDDY, ADV., FOR R2 V/O/DTD:21.09.2024 NOTICE TO R1 IS D/W)

¶14

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:18563 M.F.A. No.1912/2020

¶15

HC-KAR

¶16

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.07.04.2018 IN MVC NO.1298/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, MADDUR, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶17

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

¶18

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL

¶19

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶20

This appeal is filed by the injured appellant challenging the judgment and award dated 07.04.2018 passed in MVC.No.1298/2016 by the Senior Civil Judge & MACT, Maddur, (for short 'the Tribunal').

¶21

Though this appeal is listed for admission, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, it is taken up for final disposal.

¶22

Sri.Chethan D.T., learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Tribunal has erred in assessing the income and disability of the injured and has consequently awarded a meager compensation of

¶23

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:18563 M.F.A. No.1912/2020

¶24

HC-KAR

¶25

Rs.2,17,584/- by ignoring the evidence of the injured, the treating doctor and other medical evidence on record. It is submitted that the injured was hospitalized as an inpatient for a period of 15 days and had sustained a head injury. Hence, he seeks to allow the appeal by enhancing the compensation appropriately.

¶26

Per contra, Sri.C.Shankar Reddy, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 supports the impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal and submits that the appellant has not produced any evidence with regard to income and the Tribunal having assessed the disability at 10%, has awarded just and reasonable compensation, which does not call for any interference. Accordingly, he seeks to dismiss the appeal.

¶27

I have heard the arguments on both the sides

¶28

and perused the material available on record.

¶29

It is not in dispute that on 21.11.2015, the appellant met with a road accident and sustained grievous

¶30

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:18563 M.F.A. No.1912/2020

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

injuries, including injuries to the neck and head. He was provided treatment at General Hospital, Maddur, MIMS, Mandya, also in NIHMANS, Bengaluru and KIMS, Bengaluru and was hospitalized as an inpatient for a period of 15 days. A perusal of the oral evidence of PW1

¶33

and CW1 along with Ex.P4 - wound certificate, Ex.P7 - discharge letters and other medical records available on record indicates that the appellant sustained an injury to the left side of the brain with a haematoma in the left temporal lobe of brain. Taking note of the aforesaid injuries, the treatment provided to the appellant and keeping in mind the fact that the appellant was provided treatment in four hospitals and he was inpatient for a period of 15 days, I am of the considered view that the compensation is required to be reassessed. Accordingly, the income of the injured appellant is reassessed notionally at Rs.9,000/- per month placing reliance on the notional income chart prepared by KSLSA. However, the Tribunal was justified in assessing the disability at 10%

¶34

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:18563 M.F.A. No.1912/2020

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

and the same does not call for interference. It is not in dispute that the claimant was aged about 47 years at the time of the accident; hence, the appropriate multiplier would be 13, which has been rightly considered by the Tribunal. Having reassessed the income of the appellant/claimant, the appellant/claimant is entitled to compensation under the head of loss of future income

¶37

due to disability as under:

¶38

9,000/- x 12 x 13 x 10% = Rs.1,40,400/-

¶39

The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.74,984/-

¶40

towards medical expenses, which is unaltered. However, taking note of the oral and documentary evidence, I am of the considered view that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under other heads is required to be reassessed by appropriately enhancing the same. The appellant is entitled to the modified compensation as under:

¶41

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:18563 M.F.A. No.1912/2020

¶42

HC-KAR

¶43

HEADS	AMOUNT (in Rs.)
Pain & suffering	40,000
Loss of amenities	40,000
Medical expenses	74,984
Loss of income during laid-up period	27,000
(Rs.9,000 X 3)
Loss of future income due to disability	1,40,400
Towards conveyance, attendant charges, food and nourishment	20,000
Total	3,42,384

¶44

Thus, the appellant-claimant shall be entitled to total compensation of Rs. 3,42,384 /- as against Rs.2,74,584/awarded by the Tribunal.

¶45

In the result, this Court proceeds to pass the

¶46

following:

¶47

ORDER

¶48

a) Appeal stands allowed in part .

¶49

b) The impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal is modified to an extent that the appellant-claimant would be entitled to total compensation of Rs. 3,42,384 /- as against Rs.2,74,584/- awarded by the Tribunal.

¶50

7 -

¶51

NC: 2026:KHC:18563 M.F.A. No.1912/2020

¶52

HC-KAR

¶53

c) The enhanced compensation amount shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of payment excluding the interest for the delayed period of 522 days as per the order dated 06.03.2026.

¶54

d) The Insurance Company shall deposit the enhanced compensation amount with accrued interest before the Tribunal within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment.

¶55

e) On such deposit, the Tribunal shall release the entire enhanced compensation amount in favour of the appellant.

¶56

f) Draw modified award accordingly.

¶57

Sd/(VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE

¶58

ABK List No.: 2 Sl No.: 10

Sri Basavaraju S B v. Sri. Shankaregowda K

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Basavaraju S B v. Sri. Shankaregowda 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

Ravi Vs Reliance Gen Ins Co. Ltd.

Kumari Prakruthi Vs Raju B M

Sri M B Dayanand Vs Sri Hosalaiah

Mukesh Kumar Nahar Vs Mr. Bikam Chand

Sri P S Jayappa Vs C Manjunatha

Mr K P Abhishek Vs the Divisional Controller