Shri Harish G R Vs Shri K M Lokesh

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 22.02.2023 PASSED IN MVC NO.2990/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDITIONAL JUDGE AND MEMBER, MACT, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶20

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

¶21

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA

¶22

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶23

This appeal is filed by the appellant/claimant under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 challenging the common judgment and award dated 22.02.2023 passed in MVC Nos.2990/2019 and 2991/2019. However, MFA No.4714/2024 is filed against the award passed in MVC No.2990/2019 on the file of the III Additional Judge and Member, MACT, Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru, seeking enhancement of compensation.

¶24

Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for respondent No.2/insrance company. The ranks of the parties are retained as per Tribunal for the sake of convenience.

¶25

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:12825 MFA No. 4714 of 2024

¶26

HC-KAR

¶27

The petitioner/injured claimant met with an accident on 13.03.2019 and filed claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.10,00,000/-. The Tribunal considering the entire evidence on record granted an amount of Rs.5,53,957/with interest at the rate of 6% p.a., from the date of filing the petition till the date of deposit. Being aggrieved by the said order, this appeal is filed.

¶28

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant/claimant was earning Rs.20,000/- per month. But the Tribunal erred in taking his income at Rs.14,000/- per month. The amounts granted under other heads are also meagre. Therefore, requested for enhancement of the compensation.

¶29

Though it is stated that the petitioner/injured was earning Rs.20,000/- per month, he has not filed any income proof. As he met with an accident in the year 2019, his notional income was rightly considered by the Tribunal as Rs.14,000/per month. The petitioner/injured was aged 30 years at the time of the accident and the applicable multiplier is '17'. As per

¶30

4 -

¶31

NC: 2026:KHC:12825 MFA No. 4714 of 2024

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

Ex.P.4-wound certificate, the petitioner/injured sustained the following injuries, which are grievous in nature:

¶34

1. Cut lacerated wound over forehead/left parietal region.

¶35

2. Abrasion over right shoulder.

¶36

3. Abrasion over left knee.

¶37

4. Fracture of acromin process of RGHT scapula.

¶38

5. Fracture of nasal bone.

¶39

6. O/E nasal bleed+.

¶40

The petitioner/injured examined the doctor as PW.5 and he stated that petitioner/injured sustained Hair line fracture of right acromion, comminuted fracture of left calcaneum and underwent treatment of ORIF with calconeal plating done on 18.03.2019 and discharged on 22.03.2019. Further, on radiological examination, it is noted that comminuted fracture of left calcanium shown mal union with irregularity in articular surface of subtalar joint with implants in situ, hair line fracture right acromion shown union. The doctor assessed the disability at 21.12% to the left lower limb and 10.56% to the whole body. But the Tribunal considered the

¶41

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:12825 MFA No. 4714 of 2024

¶42

HC-KAR

¶43

disability at 8%. This Court finds no reason to interfere with the said assessment of disability. Accordingly, the Tribunal has calculated the loss of future earning capacity at Rs.2,28,480/- (14,000 × 12 × 17 × 8%) and the same is confirmed. The petitioner/injured incurred medical expenses amounting to Rs.1,86,477/- as per the relevant documents and the said amount is also confirmed. The petitioner was hospitalized for a period of ten days. The Tribunal awarded Rs.70,000/- towards pain and suffering and Rs.25,000/- towards loss of amenities, which are confirmed. The petitioner/injured might not have attended any other work at least for a period of three months. Therefore, a sum of Rs.42,000/- (14,000 × 3) is granted towards loss of income during the laid-up period. The petitioner/injured is entitled to Rs.30,000/- towards transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges. The Tribunal also awarded Rs.20,000/- towards future medical expenses, as another surgery is required for removal of implants and the said amount is confirmed.

¶44

Thus in all, compensation awarded by this Court is

¶45

as below:

¶46

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:12825 MFA No. 4714 of 2024

¶47

HC-KAR

¶48

Sl.Nos.	Particulars	Amount in Rs.
1.	Towards pain and suffering	70,000/-
2.	Towards medicine expenses	1,86,477/-
3.	Towards loss of amenities	25,000/-
4.	Towards transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges	30,000/-
5.	Towards loss of income during laid up period	42,000/-
6.	Towards loss of future earning capacity	2,28,480/-
7.	Towards loss of future medical expenses	20,000/-
	Total	6,01,957/-

¶49

Hence, the appellant-claimant is entitled for a total

¶50

compensation of Rs.6,01,957/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a.

¶51

In the result, the following order is passed:

¶52

ORDER

¶53

i. The appeal is allowed in part.

¶54

ii. The judgment and award dated 22.02.2023

¶55

passed in MVC No.2990/2019 on the file of the

¶56

7 -

¶57

NC: 2026:KHC:12825 MFA No. 4714 of 2024

¶58

HC-KAR

¶59

III Additional Judge and Member, MACT, Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru, is modified.

¶60

iii. The claimant is entitled to a sum of Rs.6,01,957/- along with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization, instead of Rs.5,53,957/- granted by the Tribunal.

¶61

iv. Respondent No.2/Insurance Company has already deposited the award amount before the Tribunal. Therefore, respondent No.2/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs.48,000/- along with the interest at the rate of 6% within one month from the date of this order.

¶62

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

¶63

vi. On 16.10.2025, the delay of 378 days is condoned by this Court on the condition that the claimant will not be entitled for the interest in case of enhancement. Hence, respondent

¶64

NC: 2026:KHC:12825 MFA No. 4714 of 2024

¶65

8 -

¶66

HC-KAR

¶67

No.2 is not liable to pay the interest for the delayed period.

¶68

Sd/(P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE

¶69

AMA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 70

Shri Harish G R v. Shri K M Lokesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Harish G R v. Shri K M Lokesh

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

Mrs Hemalatha P K Vs the Managing Director

Sri Puttaswamy M a Vs M/S Cholamandalam M S

Sri Lakshmikant Vs Sri Venkateshappa

Smt K P Neema Vs Sri Shivakumar H

Shri. Bharani. C Vs Royal Sundaram General Insurance Company Ltd.

Sri. Abhishek. K @ Abhishek Vs Smt. Savitha