Sri Vajramuni Vs Sri Kiran Kumar H S

¶1

NC: 2026:KHC:23994 MFA No. 6428 of 2025

¶2

1 -

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 6428 OF 2025 (MV-I)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI VAJRAMUNI S/O ANKAPPA M C AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/AT MENASIGANAHALLI VILLAGE, ARALALUSANDRA POST, VIRUPAKSHIPURA HOBLI, CHANNAPATTANA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT -562 138.

¶9

APPELLANT

¶10

(BY SRI. TEJAS N.,ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

SRI KIRAN KUMAR H S Digitally S/O. SHIVAKUMAR H S, signed by PADMASHREE AGED MAJOR, SHEKHAR R/AT NO.1025, HALAGURU VILLAGE, DESAI MALAVALLI TALUK, Location: High MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 430. Court of Karnataka (OWNER OF SWIFT DZIRE CAR BEARING REG. NO.KA-11-B-3262)

¶13

THE MANAGER, SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.. NO.41, AJ CHAMBER, RV ROAD, BASAVANAGUDI, BENGALURU - 560 004.

¶14

2 -

¶15

NC: 2026:KHC:23994 MFA No. 6428 of 2025

¶16

HC-KAR

¶17

(POLICY NO.100003/31/22/268738 VALID FROM 01-03-2022 TO 28-03-2023)

¶18

RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SRI. B. PRADEEP .,ADVOCATE FOR R2;

¶20

V/O DTDD 28.10.2025 NOTICE TO R1 D/W)

¶21

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.15.07.2025 PASSED IN MVC NO.657/2023 ON THE FILE OF THE XXI ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSE JUDGE AND MACT, BENGALURU, (SCCH-23), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION AND ETC,.

¶22

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL 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 15.07.2025 passed in MVC.No.657/2023 on the file of the learned XXI Additional Small Causes Judge and ACJM, Bengaluru (SCCH-23), seeking enhancement of compensation.

¶25

3 -

¶26

NC: 2026:KHC:23994 MFA No. 6428 of 2025

¶27

HC-KAR

¶28

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

¶29

The petitioner/injured met with an accident on 12.12.2022 and filed the claim petition before the Tribunal for compensation of Rs.40,00,000/-. The Tribunal considering the entire evidence on record granted an amount of Rs.10,33,900/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 and mainly contended that the petitioner was an agriculturalist and also doing dairy farming and was earning Rs.30,000/- per month. He examined the doctor as PW.2 and he assessed the whole body disability as 42%, but the Tribunal has considered only 15% which is on lower side. PW.2 stated that he requires another surgery for removal of the implants and estimated the cost Rs.1,60,000/-, but the Tribunal has not granted any amount under the head of future medical expenses. The Tribunal granted meager amounts under the other heads and interest is to be granted at

¶30

4 -

¶31

NC: 2026:KHC:23994 MFA No. 6428 of 2025

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

the higher rate and thus requested for enhancement of compensation.

¶34

Though the petitioner stated that he was working an agriculturalist and also doing dairy farming and earning Rs.30,000/- per month, but he has not filed any income proof. As he met with an accident in the year 2022, the Tribunal has rightly considered his notional income as Rs.15,500/- per month as per the chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. He was aged 31 years and the relevant multiplier is '16'. He produced Ex.P4 as wound certificate, Ex.P.7 as discharge summary, clinical note, X-ray film and other medical records. He examined the doctor as PW.2, he is an orthopedic surgeon, he stated that the petitioner sustained right femur, right tibia and fibula, left femur and right forearm both the bones fracture. He was treated with CRIF with IMIL nail for the right femur and right tibia, CRIF with IMIL nail for left femur and ORIF with plate and screws for the right radius and ulna. The petitioner now complains of weakness in the right lower limb, unable to sit down, squat and sit cross leg, unable to lift weights in the right upper limb. On examination he has waddling gait, restricted both knee movements with wasting of

¶35

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:23994 MFA No. 6428 of 2025

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

the both lower limb muscles, restricted right wrist movements. Recent X-ray of the right and left femur, X-ray of the right leg and right forearm shows united fracture with implant in-situ. He further submits that the petitioner suffers physical disability of 35% to the right arm, 34% to the both lower limb, 12% to the right upper limb and 42% disability to the whole body. He further submits that the petitioner requires another surgery for removal of the implant the estimated cost of the same is Rs.1,60,000/-. In cross-examination he stated that he is not a treated doctor. He stated that fractures are united with implant in-situ. He further stated that the petitioner is aged 30 years, therefore recovery capacity is high and deformity gradually comes down in the right forearm in regular usage of the limb. He further stated that pain in the lower limbs will gradually come down over a period of time and he also stated that he has not given estimation for removal of the implant and it is further stated that the disability will vary after the removal of the implants. This Court finds it reasonable to take the disability as 35% + 34% + 12% =81% X 1/3^rd = 27% for the purpose of calculation. As the disability is more than 20% the petitioner is entitled for further prospects as per the citation reported in

¶38

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:23994 MFA No. 6428 of 2025

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

New India Assurance Company Limited V.s ABdul S/o Mehaboob Thasildhar¹ . The petitioner was aged 31 years and he is entitled for 40% towards future prospects. Loss of future earning capacity comes to Rs.15,500/- + 40% X 12 X 16 X 27% =Rs.11,24,928/-. The Tribunal has granted an amount of Rs.3,95,000/- towards medical expenses and the said amount is confirmed. The petitioner was admitted in the hospital for a period of 2 days. Considering the nature of injuries sustained, period of hospitalization, age, occupation and other relevant records, this Court finds it reasonable to grant an amount of Rs.40,000/- towards transportation, food extra nourishment and attendant charges and Rs.30,000/- towards future medical expenses. The Tribunal has already granted Rs.80,000/towards pain and suffering, Rs.46,500/- towards loss of income during laid up period, Rs.60,000/- towards loss of amenities and the said amounts are confirmed.

¶41

Thus in all, compensation awarded by this Court is

¶42

as below:

¶43

1 MFA.Nos.103807/2016 C/w 103835/2016

¶44

7 - NC: 2026:KHC:23994 MFA No. 6428 of 2025

¶45

HC-KAR

¶46

Sl.Nos.	Particulars	Amount in Rs.
1.	Towards pain and suffering	80,000/-
2.	Towards loss of amenities	60,000/-
3.	Towards transportation, food, nourishment	40,000/-
4.	Towards loss of income during laid up period	46,500/-
5.	Towards loss of future earning capacity	11,24,928/-
6.	Medical expenses	3,95,000/-
7.	Future medical expenses	30,000/-
	Total	17,76,428/-

¶47

Hence, the appellant-claimant is entitled for a total

¶48

compensation of Rs.17,76,428 /- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a.

¶49

In the result, the following order is passed:

¶50

ORDER

¶51

i. The appeal is allowed in part.

¶52

ii. The judgment and award dated 15.07.2025 passed in MVC.No.657/2023 on the file of the learned XXI Additional Small Causes Judge and ACJM, Bengaluru (SCCH-23), is modified.

¶53

iii. The claimant is entitled to a sum of

¶54

Rs.17,76,428/- along with interest at 6% p.a.,

¶55

8 - NC: 2026:KHC:23994 MFA No. 6428 of 2025

¶56

HC-KAR

¶57

from the date of petition till the date of realization, instead of Rs.10,33,900/- granted by the tribunal.

¶58

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.7,42,528/- along with the interest at the rate of

¶59

6% within one month from the date of this order.

¶60

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

¶61

same.

¶62

Sd/(P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE

¶63

PNV - List No.: 1 Sl No.: 78

Sri Vajramuni v. Sri Kiran Kumar H S

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Vajramuni v. Sri Kiran Kumar H S

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shivaraj G E Vs Siddesh B R

B Abhishekgowda Vs G. Lakshmanagowda

Smt. Shruti Vs Sri Pavanakumar Tondikatti

Smt P Shobamma Vs M/S Tata Aig Gen Ins Co.Ltd

Srinivas a @ Manoj Vs Tata Aig General Insurance Co. Ltd.

Smt H P Anitha Vs Mrs Meenu Jain