Punith Vs H. R. Kanthegowda

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.22.11.2022 PASSED IN MVC NO.1462/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE IV ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, HASSAN SITTING, CHANNARAYAPATNA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶27

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

¶28

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA

¶29

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:15108 MFA No. 2395 of 2024

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶32

This appeal is filed by the appellant under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 challenging the judgment and award dated 22.11.2022 passed in MVC No.1462/2021, by the IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Hassan Sitting at Channarayapatna at Hassan for enhancing the compensation.

¶33

Heard the arguments of learned counsel appearing for the appellant and respondent No.2. Notice to respondent No.1 is dispensed with vide order dated 13.01.2026.

¶34

The status of the parties before the Tribunal is retained forthe sake of convenience.

¶35

It is a case of injury, injured claimant met with an accident on 09.09.2018 and filed claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.10,00,000/-. Tribunal considering the entire evidence on record, granted Rs.4,70,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization. Aggrieved by the said award this appeal is preferred in which it is mainly contented that the petitioner has sustained grievous injuries and hospitalized for a period of 8 days and the

¶36

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:15108 MFA No. 2395 of 2024

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

doctor assessed the disability of the left lower limb as 36.33%. Appellant was doing agriculture and also Dairy farming and earning Rs.20,000/- to Rs.25,000/- per month. Tribunal granted meager amount under the other heads. Therefore, requested for enhancement of the compensation.

¶39

Though it is stated that petitioner was earning Rs.20,000/- to Rs.25,000/- per month. He has not filed any income proof. As he met with an accident in the year 2018 tribunal has rightly considered his notional income as Rs.12,500/- he was aged 25 years and the multiplier is '18'. He sustained following injuries:

¶40

Pain/swelling/deformity over left thigh.

¶41

Pain/swelling/deformity over left Knee.

¶42

Deep laceration over left thigh 4 x 2 cm.

¶43

Abrasion over left knee 2 x 2 cm.,

¶44

As per Ex.P-7-wound certificate out of which one and 2

¶45

are grievous and 3 and 4 are simple injuries. Petitioner also examined doctor as PW-2 and he stated as follows:

¶46

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:15108 MFA No. 2395 of 2024

¶47

HC-KAR

¶48

The claimant admitted to the Hospital with a history of RTA and he examined the claimant and noticed Pain/swelling/deformity over left thigh, Pain/swelling deformity over left Knee, Deep laceration over left thigh 4 x 2 cm, and an Abrasion over left knee 2x2 cm. Immediately X-ray was taken, which confirmed fracture of shaft left femur and tibia condyle. On 10.09.2018 a surgery was done with IM interlocking NAIL and CC screws and the claimant was discharged on 17.09.2018 with an advise of follow-up treatment and on 12.09.2022 he recently examined the claimant and found difficulty in walking, sitting, squatting and stair claimant and malunited fracture with implant insitu with restricted hip and Knee movement. He clinically examined the claimant and assessed disability at 36.33% in respect of left lower limb.

¶49

The tribunal has considered 1/3^rd of the same as 12%.

¶50

The learned counsel for the appellant has stated that petitioner was doing agriculture and Dairy farming as such the disability is to be considered on higher side as it will have much impact on his work. But the doctor rightly assessed the disability as 36.33% and the tribunal has rightly considered 1/3^rd of it and it needs no interference. Loss of future earning capacity granted by the tribunal is Rs.3,24,000/- tribunal also granted

¶51

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:15108 MFA No. 2395 of 2024

¶52

HC-KAR

¶53

Rs.73,486/- towards medical expenses same is confirmed and admittedly he was hospitalized for 8 days therefore considering the relevant factors, this Court finds it reasonable to grant an amount of Rs.60,000/- for pain and suffering Rs.30,000/for loss of amenities and Rs.30,000/- for transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges . Petitioner might not have attended any other work atleast for a period of 4 months. Therefore, Rs.50,000/- (12,500 x 4) is to be granted under the head loss of income during laid up period . Doctor in his evidence stated that he requires another surgery for removal of the implants and estimate the cost of the surgery as Rs.40,000/- to Rs.50,000/-. Therefore, this Court finds it reasonable to grant an amount of Rs.40,000/- for future medical expenses . The total compensation comes to Rs.6,07,486/ -.

¶54

Thus in all, award of compensation passed by the Tribunal is modified as under:

¶55

7 -

¶56

NC: 2026:KHC:15108 MFA No. 2395 of 2024

¶57

HC-KAR

¶58

Particulars Amount
in Rs.
Pain and suffering 60,000.00
Loss of amenities 30,000.00
Transportation, extra 30,000.00
nourishment and
attendant charges
Loss of income during laid 50,000.00
up period
Future medical expenses 40,000.00
Medical expenses 73,486.00
Loss of future earning 3,24,000.00
capacity
Total 6,07,486.00

¶59

Hence, the compensation is enhanced from

¶60

Rs.4,70,000/- to Rs.6,07,486/- along with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit.

¶61

In the result, the following order is passed:

¶62

ORDER

¶63

i. Appeal is allowed-in-part.

¶64

ii. The judgment and award dated 22.11.2022 passed in M.V.C.No.1462/2021 by the IV

¶65

8 -

¶66

NC: 2026:KHC:15108 MFA No. 2395 of 2024

¶67

HC-KAR

¶68

Additional District and Sessions Judge, Hassan Sitting at Channarayapatna at Hassan, Hassan is modified;

¶69

iii. The appellant is entitled to a sum of Rs.6,07,486/- along with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization as against Rs.4,70,000/-.

¶70

iv. As the Insurance Company already deposited the awarded amount, respondent No.2 is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs.1,37,486/- with the interest at the rate of 6% per annum within one month from the date of this order.

¶71

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

¶72

vi. Appellant is not entitled for interest for a delay period of 400 days as per the orders in I.A No.1/2025 dated 13.01.2026.

¶73

vii. Draw award accordingly.

¶74

Sd/(P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE

¶75

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 44

¶76

VS

Punith v. H. R. Kanthegowda

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punith v. H. R. Kanthegowda

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 Varshini K M Vs Kumaraswamy

Sri. S. Ramesh Vs Sri. K P Jayaram

Mubarak Vs the Manager

Manjula Vs Chiranjeevi

Smt. Vidhya @ C P Gayathri Vs Sri Mithun K J

Sri P Vijaykumar Naidu Vs Sri Syed Saheb