Sri.Rajanna Vs the Manager

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.08.08.2024 PASSED IN MVC NO. 1666/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE XIII SMALL CAUSES AND MEMBER, MACT-15, BENGALURU SCCH-15, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶31

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

¶32

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA

¶33

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:23095 MFA No. 2855 of 2025

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶36

This appeal is preferred by the appellant-claimant against the award dated 08.08.2024 passed in MVC No.1666/2020 by the Court of XIII Addl. Small Causes and ACJM and Addl. MACT., Bengaluru (SCCH-15) [for short 'Tribunal'] claiming enhancement of compensation.

¶37

2 . The claimant Rajanna met with an accident on 21.02.2020 and filed claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.12,00,000/- towards injuries sustained by him. The Tribunal considering the evidence on record granted compensation of Rs.6,27,860/- along with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of deposit. Aggrieved by the said order, this appeal is preferred in which he mainly contended that he was aged 48 years at the time of accident and working as painter by earning Rs.800/- per day and not produced the proof of income. However, the Tribunal has rightly taken the income of the appellant at Rs.14,500/- p.m. Further, the appellant

¶38

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:23095 MFA No. 2855 of 2025

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

sustained the injuries and admitted in the hospital for 36 days and PW.2- doctor was examined and opined that injury nos.1 to 4 are simple injuries and injury no.5 is grievous injury and he assessed the disability to the left lower limb at 30% and to the whole body at 15% and the Tribunal by considering the evidence of PW.2, injuries sustained and medical records has assessed the disability to the whole body at 8%. Further, as opined by the doctor, appellant would require one more surgery for non union of fracture and removal of implants. However, the Tribunal has granted Rs.10,000/- towards future medical expenses which is on the lower side. Lastly, he contended that the compensation awarded under other heads are meager. Therefore, he requested for enhancement of compensation.

¶41

On contrary, learned counsel for respondents justified the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal and prays for dismissal of the appeal.

¶42

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:23095 MFA No. 2855 of 2025

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

Heard the arguments advanced by the learned

¶45

counsel for appellant and learned counsel for respondent No.1 -Insurance company.

¶46

The appellant is working as painter by earning Rs.800/- per day, but he has not produced the income proof. As the petitioner met with an accident in the year 2020, his notional income is to be taken as ₹14,500/- per month as per the chart prepared by Karnataka State Legal Services Authority and the Tribunal has rightly taken the income of the appellant at Rs.14,500/- per month and this Court finds no reason to interfere. The appellant was aged 48 years. Therefore, the appropriate multiplier is '13'. The appellant was hospitalized for a period of 36 days due to the injuries sustained by him which are as under:

¶47

Cut lacerated wound on right side of face, irregular shape extending from the right lip to right eye measuring about 3cmx0.5cmx0.5cm

¶48

lacerated wound in right heel, irregular shape measuring about 1.5cmx0.5cmx0.5cm

¶49

Tenderness in the abdomen

¶50

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:23095 MFA No. 2855 of 2025

¶51

HC-KAR

¶52

Lacerated wound on the right knee joint 1.5 cmx0.5cmx0.5cm

¶53

Right leg is shortened and externally rotated.

¶54

out of which injury Nos.1 to 4 are simple injuries and injury No.5 is grievous in nature and complains of difficulty to squat on floor climb upstairs walk on slope, pain in difficulty to do routine activities. Further, PW.2-doctor has assessed the disability at 30% towards left lower limb and 15% to the whole body. But the Tribunal has considered the disability to the whole body at 8%. Further, PW.2doctor has opined that the appellant requires one more surgery for non union of fracture and removal of implants. Based on the material evidence, this Court finds it appropriate to consider the disability at 10% instead of 8%. Accordingly, the loss of future earning capacity comes to Rs.2,26,200/- (14,500/-x12x13x10/100).

¶55

It is stated that the Tribunal has granted Rs.2,17,900/- towards medical expenses as per Ex.P14-

¶56

7 -

¶57

NC: 2026:KHC:23095 MFA No. 2855 of 2025

¶58

HC-KAR

¶59

medical bills and this Court finds no reason to interfere with the same and the said amount is confirmed.

¶60

Considering the nature of injuries, his avocation, hospitalization and other relevant factors, this Court finds it reasonable to grant an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- towards pain and suffering, Rs.60,000/towards loss of amenities and Rs.40,000/- towards Attendant's charges, extra diet and conveyance. Further, the Tribunal has rightly granted Rs.58,000/- towards loss of income during laid up period and this Court finds no reason to interfere with the same and the said amount is confirmed. Though PW.2-doctor stated that there is non union of fracture and the appellant requires one more surgery, but the doctor has not estimated the cost of surgery. As such, this Court finds it appropriate to grant Rs.25,000/- under future medical expenses. Further, the amount granted under other heads is confirmed.

¶61

Thus in all, components awarded by this Court

¶62

are as below,

¶63

8 - NC: 2026:KHC:23095 MFA No. 2855 of 2025

¶64

HC-KAR

¶65

Particulars	Amount in Rs.
Loss of future earning	2,26,200.00
Medical expenses	2,17,900.00
Pain and suffering	1,00,000.00
Loss of amenities	60,000.00
Attendant's charges, extra diet and conveyance	40,000.00
Loss of income during laid up period	58,000.00
Future medical expenses	25,000.00
Total	7,27,100.00

¶66

Compensation is enhanced from Rs.6,27,860/-

¶67

to Rs.7,27,100/- and the enhanced compensation is Rs.99,240/-, which carries interest at the rate of 6% per annum. Further, the insurance company has already deposited the award amount before the Tribunal.

¶68

In the result, the following order is passed:

¶69

ORDER

¶70

i. The appeal is allowed in part .

¶71

ii. The judgment and award dated 08.08.2024 passed in MVC No.1666/2020, by the Court of XIII Addl. Small Causes and

¶72

9 -

¶73

NC: 2026:KHC:23095 MFA No. 2855 of 2025

¶74

HC-KAR

¶75

ACJM and Addl. MACT, Bengaluru (SCCH15), is modified;

¶76

iii. Respondent No.1 is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs.99,240/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum within one month from the date of this order on such deposit and

¶77

iv. Appellant-claimant is permitted to withdraw the entire compensation with interest accrued on it.

¶78

v. Further, the appellant-claimant is not entitled for the interest for the delay period of 122 days vide order dated 05.02.2026.

¶79

Sd/(P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE

¶80

SSD

¶81

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5

Sri.Rajanna v. the Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri.Rajanna v. the Manager

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. Parvathi Vs Basavaraju

The Divisional Manager Vs Lakshmi

The Branch Manager, Vs R. Varshitha

Sri. Ajith Kumar R Vs Sri. Prakash G

Sri. Chowdappa Vs the Managing Director

Smt Rajeshwari Vs Sri Beerappa Koralli