The Manager, Vs Prashanth M T.

NOW REP. BY THE MANAGER, CHOLAMANDALAM MS GIC LTD., GOLDEN HEIGHTS COMPLEX, 59^TH 'C' CROSS, INDUSTRIAL SUPERB, 4^TH 'M' BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 010.

¶10

…APPELLANT

¶11

Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶12

(BY SRI. MALLIKARJUNAREDDY N.A., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. PRADEEP B., ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

PRASHANTH. M.T., S/O. K. THIMMA NALIKE, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, R/O.NO.4-206, KADAMBU HOUSE, VITLAPADNOOR, KODANGAI, BANTWAL TALUK, D.K.

¶15

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:14101 MFA No. 5268 of 2024

¶16

HC-KAR

¶17

JAYAPRAKASH, S/O. LATE KRISHNA NAYAK, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/O.3-75, NADAJE HOUSE, MANCHI, BANTWAL TALUK, D.K.

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SMT. POOJAPARVATHI. U., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. G. RAVISHANKAR SHASTRY FOR R2;

¶20

V/O DATED 22.10.2024, NOTICE TO R1 HELD SUFFICIENT)

¶21

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 26.02.2024 PASSED IN MVC.NO.890/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, ADDITIONAL MACT, PUTTUR, DAKSHINA KANNADA, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.4,29,990/- WITH INTEREST AT 9 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ITS REALIZATION AND ETC.

¶22

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

¶23

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA

¶24

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶25

Heard the arguments of both sides.

¶26

This appeal is filed by the Insurance Company

¶27

under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, challenging the judgment and award dated 26.02.2024. passed in MVC No.890/2021 by the Additional Senior Civil

¶28

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:14101 MFA No. 5268 of 2024

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

Judge and JMFC and Additional Member, MACT, Puttur (for short, 'the Tribunal') seeking enhancement of

¶31

compensation.

¶32

The injured claimant met with an accident on 06.03.2021 and filed a claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.6,00,000/-. The Tribunal, after considering the entire evidence on record granted an amount of Rs.4,29,990/- with interest at 9% per annum from the rate of petition till realisation.

¶33

Aggrieved by the said award, the Insurance Company has preferred this appeal contending that the Tribunal has erred in fixing the liability and awarding excessive compensation. It is contended that the rider of the scooter bearing No.KA-07-OH-5352 was holding only a Learner's Licence (LLR) as on the date of the accident and that an instructor was accompanying the LLR holder. It is further contended that a charge sheet was filed against the rider of the scooter and she has pleaded guilty in the criminal case. Therefore, according to the appellant, the

¶34

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:14101 MFA No. 5268 of 2024

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

entire negligence is attributable to the rider of the scooter. It is also contended that the Tribunal has erroneously granted 20% towards future prospects though the disability assessed by the doctor is only 10% but the Tribunal has taken 5% disability to the whole body. Further, it is contended that the Tribunal has awarded interest at the rate of 9% per annum, instead of 6% per annum. Hence, the appellant seeks reduction of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal .

¶37

Respondent No.1, the injured claimant contended that he was aged 31 years at the time of the accident and was working at MESCOM, doing electrical bill reading work under Santosh (Manager), Idia Infinity I.T. Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru and was earning Rs.15,000/- per month. However, the claimant has not produced any documentary evidence to substantiate his income. Since the accident occurred in the year 2021, the notional income is considered as Rs.15,000/- per month as per the chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal

¶38

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:14101 MFA No. 5268 of 2024

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

Services Authority. The claimant was aged 31 years at the

¶41

time of the accident and the applicable multiplier is '16'.

¶42

As per Ex.P6-Wound Certificate, the claimant

¶43

sustained the following injuries:

¶44

"i. Abrasion over the left knee;

¶45

ii. Abrasion over the right shoulder;

¶46

iii. AC joint dislocation Type III of the right shoulder."

¶47

Injuries No.1 and 2 are simple in nature, whereas injury No.3 is grievous in nature.

¶48

The claimant also examined the doctor as PW-

¶49

1, who deposed that the petitioner sustained 10% permanent disability to the right shoulder. The doctor further stated that the claimant may require another surgery for removal of the implant, which would cost approximately Rs.50,000/-. However, the Tribunal has taken the whole body disability as 5% and also granted 20% towards future prospects. Future prospects are generally granted when the disability exceeds 20%. In the

¶50

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:14101 MFA No. 5268 of 2024

¶51

HC-KAR

¶52

present case, the disability assessed by the doctor is only 10% and therefore the functional disability to the whole body is taken at 3%. Accordingly, the loss of future earning capacity comes to Rs.15,000 × 12 × 16 × 3% = Rs.86,400/-.

¶53

The claimant has incurred Rs.45,790/- towards medical expenses, which is supported by the medical bills produced on record. Therefore, the said amount is confirmed.

¶54

The claimant was hospitalized for a period of six days as per Ex.P-13- Discharge Summary. Considering the nature of injuries sustained, the period of hospitalisation and other relevant factors. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.40,000/- towards 'pain and suffering', which is found to be just and reasonable. Further the claimant is entitled to Rs.20,000/- towards 'loss of amenities' and Rs.30,000/towards 'transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges'. The claimant might not have attended to his work at least for a period of two months. Therefore,

¶55

7 -

¶56

NC: 2026:KHC:14101 MFA No. 5268 of 2024

¶57

HC-KAR

¶58

Rs.30,000/- is awarded under the head 'loss of income

¶59

during laid-up period'.

¶60

The Tribunal has awarded Rs.50,000/- towards

¶61

future medical expenses. However, considering the nature of injuries and the evidence available on record, this Court

¶62

finds it reasonable to award Rs.30,000/- towards 'future medical expenses'.

¶63

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

¶64

Particulars	Amount in Rs.
Loss of future earning capacity	86,400.00
Medical expenses	45,792.00
Pain and suffering	40,000.00
Loss of amenities	20,000.00
Transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges	30,000.00
Future medical expenses	30,000.00
Loss of income during laid up period	30,000.00
Total	2,82,192.00

¶65

8 -

¶66

NC: 2026:KHC:14101 MFA No. 5268 of 2024

¶67

HC-KAR

¶68

Hence, the compensation granted by the

¶69

Tribunal is reduced from Rs.4,29,990/- to Rs.2,82,192/-

¶70

In the result, pass the following:

¶71

ORDER

¶72

i. The appeal is allowed in part.

¶73

ii. The judgment and award dated 26.02.2024 passed in MVC No.890/2021 by the Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC and Additional Member, MACT, Puttur is hereby modified;

¶74

iii. Appellant/Insurance Company has already deposited statutory amount of Rs.25,000/and also 50% of the compensation awarded before the Tribunal. Therefore, the appellant/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the balance compensation, if any, along with interest at the rate of 6% within one month from the date of this order.

¶75

9 - NC: 2026:KHC:14101 MFA No. 5268 of 2024

¶76

HC-KAR

¶77

v. On such deposit, the claimants are permitted to withdraw the entire amount along with interest accrued on it.

¶78

Sd/- (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE

¶79

TMP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 60

The Manager, v. Prashanth M T.

Case brief

What is this about?

The Manager, v. Prashanth M T.

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

Rudreshgowda Vs Kumaraswamy

Mr M Krishna Vs Mr Shashikumar R

Sri Umesh Naik B K Vs Mr Basavaraju

Sri Ambresh Vs Sri Manoj Thomos

Smt. Saraswathamma, Vs Sri Kumar Singh M R

Jeevan D N Vs Dinesh K R