Partly allowed

Master Yeshavanth Gowda G.R. v. the Manager

Karnataka HC5 Jun 2026MFA/6630/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the first appeal in part, enhancing the total compensation from Rs. 5,55,000 to Rs. 6,73,461. The Court recalculated loss of future income, loss of income during laid-up period, pain and suffering, and loss of amenities, directing the insurance company to deposit the enhanced amount within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Total compensation enhanced to Rs. 6,73,461 with interest at 6% p.a.; insurance company directed to deposit within six weeks.

Master Yeshavanth Gowda G.R. Vs the Manager — Insurance | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

NC: 2026:KHC:26901 MFA No. 6630 of 2021

¶2

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K

¶8

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.6630 OF 2021(MV-I)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

MASTER YASHAVANTH GOWDA G.R.

¶11

S/O RANGEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 15 YEARS THE APPELLANT IS MINOR THROUGH REP BY HIS FATHER AS NATURAL GUARDIAN

¶12

RANGEGOWDA S/O THIMMAIAH AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/AT VAJARHALLI MANIGANAHALLI MAGADI TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT.

¶13

Digitally signed by PANKAJA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

(BY SRI. JAGADEESH H T., ADVOCATE)

¶15

AND:

¶16

…APPELLANT

¶17

THE MANAGER M/S ANMOL BHARATH GAS DISTRIBUTORS NO.20, 1ST MAIN ROAD 96 BUS ROUTE KAMALANAGARA BANGALORE-560 079

¶18

THE MANAGER UNITED INDIA INSURANCE LTD.,

¶19

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:26901 MFA No. 6630 of 2021

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

DIVISIONAL OFFICER AT IX MITHRA TOWERS, 10/4 KASTURBA ROAD BANGALORE-560 001.

¶22

…RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SMT. HARINI SHIVANAND, ADVOCATE FOR R2, VIDE ORDER DATED 08.11.2024, NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH)

¶24

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 03.03.2020 PASSED IN MVC NO. 3552/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER, MACT, XVIII ADDITIONAL JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU CITY (SCCH-4), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶25

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

¶26

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K

¶27

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶28

The claimant, being dissatisfied with the

¶29

compensation of Rs.5,55,000/- awarded by the Tribunal, is in appeal.

¶30

The fact that the accident occurred and the further fact that the offending vehicle was insured is not in dispute.

¶31

The Tribunal, on assessment of evidence, has awarded the following sums as compensation:

¶32

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:26901 MFA No. 6630 of 2021

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

Sl. No.	Particulars	Amount in (Rs.)
1.	Medical expenses	2,05,000
2.	Loss of income during hospitalization period	50,000
3.	Disability	3,00,000
	Total	5,55,000

¶35

The Tribunal, on an analysis of the medical evidence, has concluded that the claimant has suffered functional disability to the extent of 15%.

¶36

I have perused the evidence of the Doctor-PW.2 and the wound certificate-Ex.P6. The same depicts that the claimant has suffered following injuries:

¶37

i. Fracture of left knee joint

¶38

ii. Contusion over the forehead

¶39

iii. Diffuse axonal injury with head injury

¶40

(Fracture lower end of femur and inferior end of

¶41

patella)

¶42

Since the Doctor has assessed the permanent

¶43

disability at 36.99% to the left lower limb and whole body at 18.49%, the Tribunal has rightly assessed the disability at 15%

¶44

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:26901 MFA No. 6630 of 2021

¶45

HC-KAR

¶46

to the whole body. Accordingly, the disability suffered by the claimant would be at 15%.

¶47

The Tribunal has not awarded any compensation under the head of loss of future income on the ground that the claimant was a minor aged about 13 years at the time of the accident. However, considering that the claimant had suffered 15% permanent disability, the Tribunal, placing reliance on the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in Master Mallikarjun v. Divisional Manager, The National Insurance Co., awarded a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- towards permanent disability. The said finding of the Tribunal calls for interference in view of the subsequent judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Hitesh Nagjibhai Patel v. Bababhai Nagjibhai Rabari and Another, wherein it has been held that the responsibility and obligation to place on record the applicable minimum wages, as notified by the concerned Government, lies upon the contesting party, particularly the Insurance Company.

¶48

In the present case, the accident is of the year 2018. The minimum wages prescribed by the Government of Karnataka for the relevant period were Rs.10,691/- per month.

¶49

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:26901 MFA No. 6630 of 2021

¶50

HC-KAR

¶51

The said amount is therefore taken as the notional income of the claimant. Considering that the claimant was aged 13 years at the time of the accident, the appropriate multiplier applicable is ‘18’. Accordingly, the compensation towards ' loss of future income ' works out to Rs.3,46,388/- (Rs.10,691 x 12 x 18 x 15%), as against the sum of Rs.50,000/- awarded by the Tribunal under the said head.

¶52

Having regard to the length of the stay of the claimant in the hospital and having regard to the injuries suffered, it would be just and appropriate to treat the laid up period as 3 months. Thus, the claimant would be entitled to a sum of Rs.32,073/- (10,691 x 3) towards 'loss of income during the laid up period' .

¶53

Having regard to the lasting effects of the injuries on the claimant, the claimant would also be entitled to a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards loss of amenities.

¶54

Having regard to the injuries suffered by the claimant, the claimant would be entitled to a sum of Rs.30,000/- towards 'pain and suffering' .

¶55

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:26901 MFA No. 6630 of 2021

¶56

HC-KAR

¶57

Having regard to the length of the stay of the claimant in the hospital and having regard to the injuries suffered, the claimant would be entitled to a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards food, conveyance and attendant

¶58

charges.

¶59

The sums awarded as medical expenses at Rs.2,05,000/- , being based on documentary evidence, do not call for modification and hence confirmed.

¶60

Consequently, the award of the Tribunal is modified and the claimant would be entitled to the following

¶61

compensation:

¶62

Sl. No.	Compensation under different Heads	As awarded by the Tribunal	As awarded by this Court
		(Rs.)	(Rs.)
1.	Pain and sufferings	-	30,000
2.	Loss of future income	3,00,000	3,46,388
3.	Medical expenses	2,05,000	2,05,000
4.	Loss of income during the laid up period	50,000	32,073

¶63

7 - NC: 2026:KHC:26901 MFA No. 6630 of 2021

¶64

HC-KAR

¶65

	Conveyance, food,	-	50,000
5.	nourishment, attendant charges
6.	Loss of amenities in life	-	10,000
	Total	5,55,000	6,73,461

¶66

Thus, the claimant is held entitled to the total compensation of Rs.6,73,461/- as against Rs.5,55,000/-, along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till its realization.

¶67

The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the amount of compensation awarded within six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

¶68

The appeal is accordingly allowed in part .

¶69

SD/(RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE

¶70

HKV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 54

Master Yeshavanth Gowda G.R. v. the Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Master Yeshavanth Gowda G.R. v. the Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs R.Krishnamurthy

Nithin Vs Krishna G T

Sri B H Akshay Vs Pavan Kumar

Shahira M H Vs Smt Jayanthi

Smt.Poornima G Vs Sri.Shivaraju R

Harish Madikeri Vs Tata Aig General Insurance Co. Ltd.