Sri Prakash Shetty Vs Robert Putado

¶1

NC: 2026:KHC:16164 M.F.A. No.3039/2020

¶2

1 -

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF MARCH, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.3039/2020 (MV-I)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

Digitally signed by ARSHIFA BAHAR KHANAM Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶9

SRI. PRAKASH SHETTY S/O JAYAKARA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS R/AT SANNIDI NEAR DHUMAVATHI TEMPLE MOODU ALEVOOR UDUPI TQ AND DIST-574118. …APPELLANT

¶10

(BY MS. PAVANA B.K. ADV., FOR MR. PRATHEEP K.C. ADV.,)

¶11

AND:

¶12

ROBERT PUTADO S/O ANTONY PUTADO AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/AT NEAR IRODI PANCHAYATH SASTANA, UDUPI TALUK UDUPI DISTRICT-574118.

¶13

THE UNITED INDIA INS. CO. LTD., DIVISIONAL MANAGER DIVISIONAL OFFICER JEWEL PLAZA, 1ST FLOOR MARUTHI VEETHIKA UDUPI-574118.

¶14

…RESPONDENTS

¶15

(BY SRI.RAVISH BENNI, ADV., FOR R2 R1 SERVICE OF NOTICE ISD/W V.C.O.DTD:29.10.2025)

¶16

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:16164 M.F.A. No.3039/2020

¶17

HC-KAR

¶18

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.02.12.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.78/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, UDUPI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶22

This appeal is filed by the injured/claimant seeking enhancement of compensation being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 02.12.2019 passed in MVC.No.78/2017 by the Additional Senior Civil Judge and Additional MACT, Udupi, (for short, ‘Tribunal’).

¶23

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

¶24

Ms.Pavana B.K., learned counsel for

¶25

Sri.Pratheep K.C., learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Tribunal erred in assessing the income of

¶26

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:16164 M.F.A. No.3039/2020

¶27

HC-KAR

¶28

the injured at Rs.8,000/- as well as the disability at 25% to the whole body. The said assessment is contrary to the evidence of the injured as well as of PW2 and other medical evidence on record. It is submitted that the award of compensation towards pain and suffering, loss of amenities, loss of income during the laid-up period and miscellaneous expenses is also on the lower side. Hence, she seeks to re-assess the same by considering the evidence on record by allowing the appeal.

¶29

Per contra, Sri.Ravish Benni, learned counsel for the respondent-Insurance Company supports the impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal and submits that the appellant-injured has failed to produce any evidence before the Tribunal with regard to the income. Hence, the assessment of the income by the Tribunal is just and correct. It is submitted that PW2 has assessed the disability to a particular limb at 35% and by considering the same, the Tribunal assessed the disability of 18%, which itself is on the higher side. It is further

¶30

4 -

¶31

NC: 2026:KHC:16164 M.F.A. No.3039/2020

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

submitted that the award of compensation by the Tribunal under all heads is just and proper and needs no interference. Hence, seeks to dismiss the appeal.

¶34

Having heard the learned counsel appearing on both the sides, it is to be noticed that the appellantinjured met with a road accident on 03.05.2016. As per the pleadings, the appellant was an auto-driver working with the respondent No.1 and earning more than Rs.10,000/- per month. Admittedly, no proof of income was placed before the Tribunal and in the absence of the same, the income of the injured is re-assessed notionally at Rs.9,500/- per month by placing reliance on the notional income chart prepared by KSLSA. Considering the oral evidence of PW2, wound certificate as per Ex.P4, Disability Certificate as per Ex.P9, the Tribunal assessed the disability at 18%, which in my considered view is just and proper and needs no modification. Considering that the appellant was aged about 37 years as on the date of accident, the appropriate multiplier would be 15, which

¶35

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:16164 M.F.A. No.3039/2020

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

has been rightly considered by the Tribunal. Hence, the appellant is entitled to compensation under the head of loss of future income due to disability as under:

¶38

Rs.9,500 X 12 X 15 X 18% = Rs.3,07,800/-.

¶39

It is to be noticed that the appellant was inpatient for 8 days and he lost his income during the treatment period and post treatment. The wound certificate as per Ex.P4 indicates that the appellant sustained injury to the spinal cord. Considering the nature of injury suffered as is evident from the wound certificate as per Ex.P4, and in-patient for 8 days, I am of the considered view that the compensation is required to be re-assessed appropriately.

¶40

Hence, the appellant would be entitled to compensation of Rs.15,000/- towards food, nourishment, attendant, conveyance expenses; Rs.28,500/- (Rs.9,500 X 3) towards the loss of income during laid-up period; Rs.45,000/- towards pain & suffering; Rs.40,000/-

¶41

6 -

¶42

NC: 2026:KHC:16164 M.F.A. No.3039/2020

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

towards loss of amenities in life. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards medical expenses is unaltered. Thus, the appellant would be entitled to modified compensation as under:

¶45

HEADS	AMOUNT (in Rs.)
Medical expenses	27,585
Food, nourishment, attendant,	15,000
conveyance expenses
Loss of income during laid up period	28,500
Loss of future income due to disability	3,07,800
Pain & suffering	45,000
Loss of amenities, future happiness	40,000
Total	4,63,885
Rounded off to	4,64,000

¶46

Thus, the appellant-claimant shall be entitled to a

¶47

total compensation of Rs.4,64,000/- as against

¶48

Rs.3,66,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.

¶49

In the result, this Court proceeds to pass the

¶50

following:

¶51

ORDER

¶52

a) Appeal is allowed in part .

¶53

7 -

¶54

NC: 2026:KHC:16164 M.F.A. No.3039/2020

¶55

HC-KAR

¶56

b) The impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal is modified to an extent that the appellant-claimant would be entitled to a total compensation of Rs.4,64,000/- as against Rs.3,66,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.

¶57

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.

¶58

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.

¶59

e) The entire compensation amount shall be released in favour of the appellantclaimant.

¶60

f) Registry shall transmit the records to the Tribunal forthwith.

¶61

g) Draw modified award accordingly.

¶62

Sd/(VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE

¶63

BSR/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13

Sri Prakash Shetty v. Robert Putado

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Prakash Shetty v. Robert Putado

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. Chitthamma Vs Thammanna

Sri Nagappa N G Vs Secretary

Ravi G.K. Vs Smt.Parameshwari Amma

Sri. Syed Aslam Vs Sri. M S Dinesh

H R Lingaraju Vs Rajesh C a

Sri. Charmaray Desunagi Vs M/S. United India Insurance Co. Ltd.