Smt Rajeshwari Vs Sri Beerappa Koralli

SRI BEERAPPA KORALLI S/O. SIDDAPPA KORALLI R/AT. UDNOOR, GULBARGA TALUK AND DISTRICT, KARNATAKA 585 101. (R.C.OWNER OF MOTOR CYCLE BEARING REG. NO.KA-32-X-6237).

¶15

THE MANNAGER CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., UNIT NO.4, 9TH FLOOR, LEVEL - 6, GOLDEN HEIGHTS COMPLEX, 59TH 'C' CROSS, RAJAJINAGARA, BENGALURU. (INSURER OF MOTOR CYCLE BEARING REG. NO.KA-32-X-6237 POLICY NO.3372/00935301/000/00 VALIDITY PERIOD 03.10.2023 TO 02.10.2024).

¶16

RESPONDENTS

¶17

(BY SRI. MALLIKARJUN.,ADVOCATE FOR SRI. B. PRADEEP., ADVOCATE FOR R2;

¶18

2 -

¶19

NC: 2026:KHC:23589 MFA No. 2774 of 2026

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

V/O DTD 21.04.2026 NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH)

¶22

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 28.11.2025 PASSED IN MVC.NO.2183/2024 ON THE FILE OF THE VIII ADDITIONAL JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES AND ACJM, MACT, BENGALURU (SCCH-5), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶23

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

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA

¶25

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶26

This appeal is filed by the appellant/claimant under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 challenging the judgment and award dated 28.11.2025 passed in MVC.No.2183/2024 on the file of the learned VIII Additional Judge Court of Small Causes and ACJM and the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (SCCH-5), Bengaluru, seeking enhancement of compensation.

¶27

Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for respondent No.2/Insurance Company. The ranks of the parties are retained as per Tribunal for the sake of convenience.

¶28

3 -

¶29

NC: 2026:KHC:23589 MFA No. 2774 of 2026

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

The petitioner/injured met with an accident on 16.02.2024 and filed the claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.15,00,000/-. The Tribunal considering the entire evidence on record granted an amount of Rs.2,28,574/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a., from the date of filing the petition till the date of deposit. Being aggrieved by the said order, this appeal is filed and mainly contended that the petitioner was aged 44 years working as a tailor and earning Rs.22,000/- per month. She sustained grievous injuries and the doctor assessed the limb disability as 25% and whole body disability as 9%. But the Tribunal erred in taking the same as 5%. The Tribunal granted meager amounts under the other heads and interest is to be granted at the higher rate and thus requested for enhancement of compensation.

¶32

Though it is stated that the petitioner was earning

¶33

Rs.22,000/- per month, she has not filed any income proof. As she met with an accident in the year 2024, this Court finds it reasonable to take her notional income as Rs.16,500/- per month as per the chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. She was aged 44 years and the relevant multiplier is '14'. The petitioner also filed Ex.P6 wound

¶34

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:23589 MFA No. 2774 of 2026

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

certificate and other medical records. She examined the doctor as PW.2 who is an Orthopedic surgeon, he stated that the petition sustained distal radius fracture left limb and treated her conservatively. She complains of pain in left wrist, difficulty ablution lift weight over the head with left upper limb, buttoning, difficulty to do routine activities. The radiological examination shows fractures are united. He further submits that the petitioner suffers from permanent physical disability of 25% of left upper limb and 9% to the whole body. He assessed only physical disability but not functional disability. He is not aware about the occupation of the petitioner. The petitioner can do her day to day work with some difficulty. Considering the medical evidence on record, this Court finds it reasonable to take the disability as 1/3^rd of 25% i.e., is 8% instead of 5%. So the loss of future earning capacity come to Rs.16,500/- X 14 X 12 X 8% = Rs.2,21,760/-. The Tribunal has granted and amount of Rs.1,974/- towards medical expenses and the said amount is confirmed. Considering the nature of injuries, period of hospitalization and other relevant factors, this Court finds it reasonable to grant an amount of Rs.40,000/- towards pain and suffering, Rs.20,000/- towards loss of amenities, and

¶37

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:23589 MFA No. 2774 of 2026

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

Rs.30,000/- towards transportation, food nourishment and attendant charges. The petitioner might not have attended any other work at least for a period of two months. The Tribunal has already granted an amount of Rs.33,000/- towards loss of income during laid up period and the said amount is confirmed.

¶40

Thus in all, compensation awarded by this Court is

¶41

as below:

¶42

Sl.Nos.	Particulars	Amount in Rs.
1.	Towards pain and suffering	40,000/-
2.	Medical expenses	1,974/-
3.	Towards loss of amenities	20,000/-
4.	Towards food, nourishment and attendant charges	30,000/-
5.	Towards loss of income during laid up period	33,000/-
6.	Towards loss of future earning capacity	2,21,760/-
	Total	3,46,734/-

¶43

Hence, the appellant-claimant is entitled for a total

¶44

compensation of Rs.3,46,734/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a.

¶45

In the result, the following order is passed:

¶46

ORDER

¶47

i. The appeal is allowed in part.

¶48

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:23589 MFA No. 2774 of 2026

¶49

HC-KAR

¶50

ii. The judgment and award dated 28.11.2025 passed in MVC.No.2183/2024 on the file of the learned VIII Additional Judge Court of Small Causes and ACJM and the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (SCCH-5), Bengaluru, is modified.

¶51

iii. The claimant is entitled to a sum of Rs.3,46,734/- along with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization, instead of Rs.2,28,574/- granted by the Tribunal.

¶52

iv. Respondent No.2/Insurance Company has already deposited the award amount before the Tribunal. Therefore, respondent No.2/Insurance Company is directed to deposit enhanced compensation of Rs.1,18,160/- along with the interest at the rate of 6% within one month from the date of this order.

¶53

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

¶54

same.

¶55

Sd/(P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE

¶56

PNV - List No.: 1 Sl No.: 61

Smt Rajeshwari v. Sri Beerappa Koralli

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Rajeshwari v. Sri Beerappa Koralli

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

Sri.Rajanna Vs the Manager

Sri. Chowdappa Vs the Managing Director

Sri. Ajith Kumar R Vs Sri. Prakash G

Prajwala Vs the Manager

B Abhishekgowda Vs G. Lakshmanagowda

Smt. Shruti Vs Sri Pavanakumar Tondikatti