Shankar Vs Ashish Kumar K

ASHISH KUMAR K S/O KISHAN LALA SHARMA, AGED MAJOR, RESIDING AT NO.11, ANUSHA NIVAS (GROUND FLOOR), 7^TH CROSS, AVANI SRINERI NAGAR, NYABNAPPANAHALLI MAIN ROAD, BEGUR, BENGALURU - 560 068.

¶16

UNITED INDIA INS. CO. LTD REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER 6^TH FLOOR, KRUSHI BHAVAN, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI. C. SHANKAR REDDY., ADVOCATE FOR R2, V/O DATED 01.04.2026, NOTICE TO R1 IS D/W)

¶19

NC: 2026:KHC:19707 MFA No. 4546 of 2024

¶20

2 -

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.01.03.2024 PASSED IN MVC NO.1760/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE XII ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES COURT, ACMM, MACT, BENGALURU, (SCCH-8), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶23

THIS APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED ON 01.04.2026 COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT THIS DAY, P SREE SUDHA J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA

¶24

CAV JUDGMENT

¶25

This appeal is filed against the judgment and award dated 01.03.2024 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and XII Additional Small Causes Court and ACMM, Bengaluru in MVC No.1760 of 2020.

¶26

The injured claimant, aged 22 years, met with an accident on 10.05.2020, and filed a claim application claiming compensation of Rs.15,00,000/-. The Tribunal, considering the entire evidence on record, granted the compensation of Rs.3,01,755/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation.

¶27

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:19707 MFA No. 4546 of 2024

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

Aggrieved by the said order, this appeal is preferred by the appellant-claimant in which it is mainly contended that he was aged 22 years at the time of the accident, doing tailoring work and earning Rs.20,000/- per month, but the tribunal has taken his income as Rs.12,000/- per month, which is on lower side. He has taken treatment as an inpatient for 7 days and spent more than Rs.1,00,000/- towards medical expenses. He also examined doctor as P.W.2 who assessed permanent disability as 42% to the limb and 14% to the whole body and Exhibit P33 is the disability certificate. Therefore, the Tribunal ought to have taken the disability as 42% by adding future prospects, but erred in taking the same as 8%. The amounts granted under the other heads are meagre and interest is to be granted at the rate of 12% per annum. Therefore, requested for enhancement of the compensation.

¶30

Heard the learned counsel appearing for both sides.

¶31

Though the petitioner stated that he was working as a tailor and earning Rs.20,000/- per month, he has not filed any income proof. As he met with an accident in the year 2020, his

¶32

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:19707 MFA No. 4546 of 2024

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

notional income is to be taken at Rs.14,500/- per month as per the chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. He was aged 22 years at the time of accident and the relevant multiplier is 18. Petitioner also examined the doctor as P.W.2 and he stated that petitioner sustained following injuries:

¶35

“ Abrasion over middle 1/3rd of right leg,

¶36

Lacerated wound over lateral aspect of right foot,

¶37

Tenderness over right foot,

¶38

Swelling and tenderness over right leg.

¶39

X-ray revealed-fracture base and shaft of 5th metatarsal, oblique comminuted displaced fracture of mid shaft of tibia and fibula.”

¶40

The petitioner underwent CRIF with IMIL for right tibia. PW2 has stated that the petitioner sustained right leg both bones fracture and assessed the disability of the right lower limb as 42% and that of the whole body as 14%. In the crossexamination, PW2 has stated that he is not a treated doctor, and as the petitioner was aged 22 years, his wounds are healed quickly. He further stated that implants were put only to tibia and conservative treatment was given to fibula. He further

¶41

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:19707 MFA No. 4546 of 2024

¶42

HC-KAR

¶43

stated that hip movement and toe movement is normal, but the movement of knee and ankle is not normal.

¶44

Learned counsel for the appellant has relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of SANDEEP KHANUJA Vs. ATUL DANDE AND ANOTHER reported in (2017) 3 SCC 351 , in which the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that the Tribunal has given a finding that claimant therein was a Chartered Accountant sustained 70% permanent disability and it will not have any impact on the earning capacity of the claimant as he was a Chartered Accountant. But the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that his employment requires not only sitting at table, but he has to appear before the Assessing Authorities and Appellate Authorities under Income Tax Act. His primary work is to do audit work. Therefore, the finding of the Tribunal is erroneous.

¶45

In the present case, it is stated that the petitioner was

¶46

a tailor, but he has not filed any document to prove his occupation. Therefore, presuming that his occupation is tailor, notional income of Rs.14,500/- was taken for the purpose of calculation. This Court further finds it reasonable to take the

¶47

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:19707 MFA No. 4546 of 2024

¶48

HC-KAR

¶49

disability as 14% (one third of 42%). So the loss for future earning capacity comes to Rs.4,38,400/- (14,500 x 12 x 18 x 14%). The Tribunal granted Rs.35,995/- for medical expenses

¶50

as per the relevant documents and it needs no interference.

¶51

Exhibit P4 is the wound certificate and Exhibit P5 is the discharge summary. Petitioner was hospitalized for a period of 7 days as per the discharge summary under Exhibit P5. Considering the nature of injuries, period of hospitalization, occupation of the claimant and the other relevant factors, this Court finds it reasonable to grant an amount of Rs.50,000/- for pain and suffering, Rs.20,000/- for loss of amenities, and Rs.30,000/for transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges. He might not have attended any other work at least for a period of 3 months. Therefore, Rs.43,500/(14,500x3) is granted towards loss of income during the laid up period. This Court also finds it reasonable to grant an amount of Rs.30,000/- for future medical expenses. Thus, in all, the claimant is entitled for the compensation of Rs.6,47,975/- with interest at 6% per annum as against Rs.3,01,755/- awarded by the Tribunal.

¶52

7 - NC: 2026:KHC:19707 MFA No. 4546 of 2024

¶53

HC-KAR

¶54

The award of compensation passed by the Tribunal is

¶55

modified as under:

¶56

Heads	Amount in Rs.
1. Loss of future income	4,38,400/-
2. Medical expenses	35,995/-
3. Pain and Suffering	50,000/-
4. Loss of amenities	20,000/-
5. Transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges	30,000/-
6. Loss of earning during the laid up period	43,500/-
7. Future Medical expenses	30,000/-
Total	6,47,975/-