Chethan a R Vs Ranjit Nair

RANJIT NAIR S/O K NARAYANAN VILLA 101, PRESTIGE LAKE SIDE, HABITAT, GUNJUR VARTHUR KODI BENGALURU- 560087 2. TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., BY ITS MANAGER, MOTOR CLAIMS HUB, NO. 69, JP AND DEVI, JAMBUKESHWARA ARCADE, 3RD FLOOR, MILLERS ROAD, BENGALURU- 560 052..

¶14

…RESPONDENTS

¶15

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:20115 MFA No. 5025 of 2024

¶16

HC-KAR

¶17

(BY SRI. MALLIKARJUNA REDDY N.A., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. B. PRADEEP, ADVOCATE FOR R2;

¶18

R1 SD)

¶19

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 06.12.2023 PASSED IN MVC NO.1624/2023 ON THE FILE OF THE XV ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND XXIII ACMM, MACT, MAYO HALL UNIT, BENGALURU, (SCCH-19), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶20

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

¶21

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA

¶22

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶23

Heard the arguments of both sides.

¶24

This appeal is filed by the appellant under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, challenging the judgment and award dated 06.12.2023 passed in MVC No.1624/2023 by the XV Additional Small Causes Judge and XXIII ACMM, Member, MACT, Mayo Hall Unit,

¶25

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:20115 MFA No. 5025 of 2024

¶26

HC-KAR

¶27

Bengaluru (SCCH-19) (for short, 'the Tribunal') seeking enhancement of compensation.

¶28

The injured claimant met with an accident on 04.03.2023 and filed a claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.25,00,000/-. The Tribunal, after considering the entire evidence on record granted an amount of Rs.5,84,500/- with interest at 9% per annum from the date of petition till realisation .

¶29

Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant has preferred this appeal, contended that he was aged 33 years, working as a plumber and earning Rs.30,000/- per month, but the Tribunal erred in assessing his income at only Rs.15,000/- per month. It is further contended that the claimant sustained grievous injuries, but the Tribunal awarded meager compensation under various heads. The doctor assessed disability at 42% to the left lower limb and 14% to the whole body, however, the Tribunal considered it as 13% instead of 14%.

¶30

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:20115 MFA No. 5025 of 2024

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

Though the appellant stated that he was

¶33

earning Rs.30,000/- per month, no documentary proof was produced. As the accident occurred in the year 2023, this Court finds it appropriate to take the notional income at Rs.16,000/- per month, as per the chart prepared by

¶34

the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. The appellant was aged 33 years and the applicable multiplier is ‘16’.

¶35

As per Ex.P5 wound certificate, the appellant

¶36

sustained the following injury:

¶37

i. Fracture (Type-1) of both bones of the left leg, mid one-third, with comminution.

¶38

ii. CRIF with IMIL nail on 04.03.2023 and later discharged on 06.03.2023.

¶39

iii. Complains of pain and weakness in the left lower limb, unable to sit, squat, or sit crosslegged.

¶40

iv. Restricted left knee and ankle movements and limited activities.

¶41

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:20115 MFA No. 5025 of 2024

¶42

HC-KAR

¶43

v. X-ray of the left leg shows a united fracture with implant in situ.

¶44

Ex.P-12 is the discharge summary. The appellant also

¶45

examined a doctor as PW.2, who stated that the appellant sustained fractures of both bones of the left leg. He was treated with CRIF and was on regular follow-up. The fractures were united. He finally stated that the physical disability of the lower limb is 42% and that of the whole body is 14%. He also stated that the appellant requires another surgery for removal of the implants and estimated the cost at Rs.60,000/-. He is not a treated doctor. He stated that the fractures are united and the implant can be removed. He further stated that the present restriction of movement is not severe. If the implants are removed and the limb is used regularly, the disability will reduce, and there is no shortening of the limb. Considering the medical evidence, this Court finds it reasonable to take the disability at one-third of 42%, i.e., 14%. Thus, the loss of

¶46

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:20115 MFA No. 5025 of 2024

¶47

HC-KAR

¶48

future earning capacity comes to Rs.16,000/- x 12 x 16 x

¶49

14% = Rs.4,30,080/-.

¶50

The Tribunal awarded Rs.1,11,065/- towards medical expenses and Rs.30,000/- towards future medical expenses and the said amounts are confirmed.

¶51

The appellant was admitted to the hospital for a

¶52

period of three days. Considering the nature of injuries, period of hospitalisation and other relevant factors, this Court finds it reasonable to award Rs.50,000/- towards pain and suffering, Rs.30,000/- towards loss of amenities, and Rs.30,000/towards transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges. The appellant might not have attended any other work at least for a period of three months. Therefore, Rs.16,000/-x 3 months = Rs.48,000/- is awarded towards loss of income during laidup period.

¶53

Thus, the compensation awarded by this Court is as follows:

¶54

7 -

¶55

NC: 2026:KHC:20115 MFA No. 5025 of 2024

¶56

HC-KAR

¶57

Particulars	Amount in Rs.
Loss of future earning	4,30,080.00
capacity
Pain and suffering	50,000.00
Loss of amenities	30,000.00
Transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges	30,000.00
Medicalexpenses	1,11,065.00
Loss of income during laid up period	48,000.00
Future medical expenses	30,000.00
Total	7,29.145.00

¶58

The appellant/claimant is entitled to a total

¶59

compensation of Rs.7,29,145/- as against Rs.5,84,500/awarded by the Tribunal. The enhanced compensation works out to Rs.1,44,645/-. To this extent, the award passed by the Tribunal is modified.

¶60

In the result, pass the following:

¶61

ORDER

¶62

i. The appeal is allowed in part.

¶63

ii. The judgment and award dated 06.12.2023 passed in MVC No.1624/2023

¶64

by the XV Additional Small Causes Judge

¶65

8 - NC: 2026:KHC:20115 MFA No. 5025 of 2024

¶66

HC-KAR

¶67

and XXIII ACMM, Member, MACT, Mayo Hall Unit, Bengaluru (SCCH-19), is hereby modified;

¶68

iii. The appellant-claimant is entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.1,44,645/with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till its realization.

¶69

iv. Respondent No.2/Insurance Company has already deposited the awarded amount before the Tribunal. Therefore, Insurance Company is directed to deposit enhanced compensation of Rs.1,44,645/with interest rate of 6% within one month from the date of this order.

¶70