Sri Babu Poojary Vs Sri Sadananda Sapaliga

SRI. BABU POOJARY S/O LATE POOVA POOJARY AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS R/AT DENTHADKA HOUSE BILIYOOR VILLAGE AND POST BANTWAL TALUK, D.K. DIST NOW R/O UPPINANGADY OF UPPINANGADY VILLAGE PUTTR TALUK, D.K.

¶10

(BY SRI. RAJARAM SOORYAMBAIL, ADV.,)

¶11

…APPELLANT

¶12

AND:

¶13

SRI. SADANANDA SAPALIGA S/O KORAGAPPA SAPALIGA AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS R/O NO.2-36/9, RAJASHREE NIVAS PINTO GARDEN PADAVINANGADY POST KONCHADY, MANGALURU D.K. DISTRICT.

¶14

THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. DIVISIONAL OFFICE CENTENARY BUILDING 2ND FLOOR, G H S ROAD MANGALORE, D.K.

¶15

…RESPONDENTS

¶16

(BY SRI. A.M. VENKATESH, ADV., FOR R2 V/O/DTD:23.06.2025, NOTICE TO R1 IS D/W)

¶17

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:19795 M.F.A. No.3167/2020

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 22.04.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.1672/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE V ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, D.K. MANGALURU SITTING AT PUTTUR D.K AND MEMBER, ADDITIONAL MACT, PUTTUR DK., PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶23

This appeal is filed by the injured/claimant seeking enhancement of compensation being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 22.04.2019 passed in MVC.No.1672/2017 by the V Additional District and Sessions Judge and Member, Additional MACT, D.K.Mangaluru sitting at Puttur, D.K., (for short, ‘Tribunal’).

¶24

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

¶25

NC: 2026:KHC:19795 M.F.A. No.3167/2020

¶26

3 -

¶27

HC-KAR

¶28

Heard Sri.Rajaram Sooryambail, learned

¶29

counsel for the appellant and Sri.A.M.Venkatesh, learned counsel for the respondent No.2-Insurance Company.

¶30

The records indicate that the appellant-injured

¶31

met with a road accident on 19.06.2017 and sustained

¶32

following injuries as is evident from Ex.P3 wound certificate:

¶33

"(1) Abrasion over posterior medial aspect of middle 1/3rd region of the right leg measuring 5cm x 1cm red in colour.

¶34

(2) Tenderness over lumbo-sacral region, contusion present, Imp fracture of L1 spine.

¶35

(3) Tenderness over the Para spinal region red in colour.

¶36

(4) Tenderness over lumber and umbilical region of the abdomen.

¶37

(5) Tenderness and contusion over the T12 spine. (6) Tenderness over the left hip. X-ray L-S spine shows-"compression fracture of T12 and L1 spine".

¶38

X-ray pelvis shows- "Fracture of superior pubic ramus (L)"

¶39

In order to prove the claim, the appellant-

¶40

claimant examined himself as PW-1 and Dr.Pradeep Kumar

¶41

as PW2, who has opined that injury Nos.2, 5 and 6 are

¶42

grievous in nature and injury Nos.1, 3 and 4 are simple in

¶43

nature and he has assessed disability to the extent of 14%

¶44

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:19795 M.F.A. No.3167/2020

¶45

HC-KAR

¶46

to the spine and 8% to the left hip. Considering the same, Tribunal has rightly assessed the disability at 14% which needs no interference.

¶47

The Tribunal assessed the income of the appellant at Rs.9,000/- per month. Admittedly, injured has not produced any proof of income. Hence, his income is notionally assessed at Rs.11,000/- per month placing reliance on the notional income chart prepared by KSLSA. The appellant was aged about 65 years, hence, the appropriate multiplier would be '7', which has been rightly considered by the Tribunal. The appellant was inpatient for 5 days and taking note of the fact that he has suffered injuries and fractures referred supra and considering the oral evidence of PW2 Doctor, I am of the view that the compensation is required to be reassessed appropriately. Accordingly, the appellant is entitled to compensation under the head of loss of future income due to disability as under:

¶48

Rs.11,000 X 12 X 7 X 14% = Rs.1,29,360/-.

¶49

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:19795 M.F.A. No.3167/2020

¶50

HC-KAR

¶51

7. Further, the appellant would be entitled to

¶52

compensation of Rs.33,000/- (Rs.11,000 X 3) towards

¶53

the loss of income during laid-up period; Rs.20,000/- towards food, nourishment, conveyance and attendant charges; Rs.40,000/- towards loss of amenities in life. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards pain and suffering and medical expenses is unaltered.

¶54

Thus, the appellant would be entitled to

¶55

modified compensation as under:

¶56

HEADS	AMOUNT (in Rs.)
Pain and suffering	54,000
Medical expenses	6,680
Loss of income during laid up period	33,000
Food, nourishment, conveyance and attendant charges	20,000
Loss of future income due to disability	1,29,360
Loss of amenities in life	40,000
Total	2,83,040
Rounded off to	2,83,100

¶57

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:19795 M.F.A. No.3167/2020

¶58

HC-KAR

¶59

Thus, the appellant-claimant shall be entitled to a

¶60

total compensation of Rs.2,83,100/- as against Rs.2,06,600/- awarded by the Tribunal.

¶61

In the result, this Court proceeds to pass the

¶62

following:

¶63

ORDER

¶64

a) Appeal is allowed in part .

¶65

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.2,83,100/- as against Rs.2,06,600/- awarded by the Tribunal.

¶66

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.

¶67

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.

¶68

NC: 2026:KHC:19795 M.F.A. No.3167/2020

¶69