Mr. Abdul Khader Vs United India Insurance Co. Ltd.

¶1

1 -

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:29161 MFA No. 4270 of 2016

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 4270 OF 2016 (MV-I)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

MR. ABDUL KHADER S/O H A IDDINABBA AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, R/O KODIKERE HOUSE, KULAI POST AND VILLAGE MANGALURU TALUK-574 142.

¶9

…APPELLANT

¶10

(BY SRI. GURUPRASAD B R., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., SRI VITTALA, NH-17, MAIN ROAD, SURATHKAL, MANGALURU-574 158 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER.

¶13

Digitally signed by PADMASHREE SHEKHAR DESAI Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶14

MR K SRINIVASALU S/O K VENKATRAYA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/AT “PAVITHRA”, D.NO.2-61-4 PREETHINAGARA, 1^ST CROSS, KULAI POST, MANGALURU TALUK-574 142.

¶15

…RESPONDENTS

¶16

(BY SRI. JANARDHAN REDDY., ADVOCATE FOR R1, V/O DTD: 05.03.2022 NOTICE TO R2 IS D/W)

¶17

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:11.01.2016 PASSED IN MVC NO.1144/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDITIONAL SENIOR

¶18

2 -

¶19

NC: 2026:KHC:29161 MFA No. 4270 of 2016

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC, MANGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶22

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA

¶23

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶24

This appeal is filed by the appellant/claimant under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 challenging the judgment and award dated 11.01.2016 passed in MVC No.1144/2013 by III Additional Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Mangaluru, for enhancing the compensation.

¶25

Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for

¶26

the appellant and learned counsel for respondent No.1. The ranks of the parties are retained as per tribunal for the sake of convenience.

¶27

Injured claimant met with an accident on 12.05.2013 and filed petition claiming compensation of Rs.15,00,000. The Tribunal considering the entire evidence

¶28

on record granted an amount of Rs.2,28,588/- with

¶29

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:29161 MFA No. 4270 of 2016

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from date of petition till realisation.

¶32

Aggrieved by the said order, he preferred an appeal and mainly contended that he was aged 28 years at the time of the accident and was working as an accountant in Razi Construction at Empire Mall, MG Road, Mangalore and earning Rs.9,500/per month. He sustained grievous injuries and was admitted in the hospital for a period of 13 days. The Tribunal granted meager amounts under the other heads and he sustained 20% disability to the face and thus requested for enhancement of the compensation.

¶33

Petitioner stated that he is working as an accountant in Razi Construction and he examined PW3 employer and also filed Ex.P11 salary certificate to show that he was earning Rs.9,500/- per month as on the date of accident and later because of the injuries he could not work there. PW3 in his evidence stated that the petitioner was working with them as an accountant and getting a

¶34

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:29161 MFA No. 4270 of 2016

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

salary of Rs.9,500/- per month and he filed 13 cash vouchers and also stated that after he met with an accident, he is not coming for work with them. He was aged 28 years and the relevant multiplier taken is ‘17’.

¶37

Petitioner sustained following injuries,

¶38

(I) Fracture of anterior cranial fossa with cerebral edema,

¶39

(II) Fracture of maxilla bone bilaterall,

¶40

(III) Comminuted fracture of infra orbital rim on right side,

¶41

(IV) Fracture of nasal bone and

¶42

(V) Fracture of zygomatic complex on both sides (facial bones)

¶43

He also examined doctor as PW2 and he gave his opinion under Ex.P9/disability certificate and stated that the petitioner has the inability to close the right eye tightly and there is increase in right palpebral fissure. Right eye is bigger than the left eye. The said disability is sustained by the road traffic accident and they are likely to be permanent in nature. The disability for the face can be assessed to be 20% of the face. He further stated that he

¶44

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:29161 MFA No. 4270 of 2016

¶45

HC-KAR

¶46

took treatment as an inpatient for 13 day and also stated that he requires one more surgery for removal of the implant and the estimated cost of the same is Rs.40000/Therefore, as 20% is the disability assessed to the face, this Court finds it is reasonable to take one third of the same as 7%. So loss of future earning capacity comes to Rs.9,500 x 12 x 17 x 7% = 1,35,660/-. Considering the nature of injuries period of hospitalisation and other relevant factors, this court finds that it is just and reasonable to grant an amount of Rs.60,000 /- towards pain and suffering, Rs.30,000/- for loss of amenities, Rs.30,000/- for transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges. He is also entitled for Rs.40,000/- towards future medical expenses. Petitioner spent an amount of Rs.1,20,088/- towards medical expenses as per Ex.P13. Therefore, he is entitled for medical expenses to an extent of Rs.1,20,088/-. He might not have attended any other work at least for a period of 3 months due to the injuries sustained in the accident. Therefore, an amount of

¶47

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:29161 MFA No. 4270 of 2016

¶48

HC-KAR

¶49

Rs.28,500/- (Rs.9500 x 3) is to be granted under the

¶50

head loss of income during laid up period.

¶51

Thus in all, components awarded by this court are

¶52

as below,

¶53

Sl.Nos.	Particulars	Amount in Rs.
1	loss of future earning capacity	1,35,660
2	Pain and suffering	60,000
3	Loss of amenities	30,000
4	Transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges.	30,000
5	Loss of income during laid down period	28,500
6	Medical expenses	1,20,088
7	Future medical expenses	40,000
	Total	4,44,248

¶54

Hence, the compensation granted by tribunal is enhanced from Rs.2,28,588/- to Rs. 4,44,248 /- along with interest

¶55

at the rate of 6% p.a.

¶56

7 -

¶57

NC: 2026:KHC:29161 MFA No. 4270 of 2016

¶58

HC-KAR

¶59

7. In the result, the following order is passed:

¶60

ORDER

¶61

i. Appeal is allowed in part.

¶62

ii. The judgment and award dated 11.01.2016 passed in MVC No.1144/2013 by III Additional Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Mangaluru, is modified.

¶63

iii. The claimant is entitled to a sum of Rs. 4,44,248 /- along with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization, instead of Rs.2,28,588/granted by the tribunal.

¶64

iv. Respondent/Insurance Company has already deposited the awarded amount before the tribunal. Therefore, respondent/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs.2,15,660/- along with the interest at the rate of 6% within one month from the date of this order.

¶65

8 - NC: 2026:KHC:29161 MFA No. 4270 of 2016

¶66

HC-KAR

¶67

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

¶68

Sd/(P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE

¶69

AKV CT:NR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 54

Mr. Abdul Khader v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Abdul Khader v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd.

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

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Sharief @ Mohammed Sharief

Smt. Kavyashree. v. S. Vs Sri. Shiva Kumar. K. L.

Smt Daisy Sunny Vs Sri Reva

Rajappa Vs Sri. Vijayakumara S

Sri Mallikarjunaswamy B.S., Vs Channaiah T C

The Proprietor Vs M/S Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.