Sumaiya Saif Vs Ms Global Tech Solution

REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR SRI SIDDARTH DHURKA R/AT 54/1 AND 54/2 8^TH CROSS KUMARA PARK WEST CENTRAL STREET BENGALURU - 560 020 BENGALURU - 560 078

¶17

SRI RAKESH KUMAR DHURKA AGED MAJOR R/AT 54/1 AND 54/2 8TH CROSS KUMARA PARK WEST CENTRAL STREET BENGALURU- 560020 BENGALURU - 560 078.

¶18

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:19443 MFA No. 6700 of 2025

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

3. THE MANAGER

¶21

UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE KRUSHI BHVAN NEAR HUDSON CIRCLE

¶22

BENGALURU - 560 027

¶23

…RESPONDENTS

¶24

(BY SRI. B. PRADEEP, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. H.C. VRUSHABHENDRAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR R3 VIDE ORDER DATED 05.01.2026, NOTICE TO R1 AND R2 IS DISPENSED WITH)

¶25

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 21.08.2024 PASSED IN MVC NO.95/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE XIII ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE, ACJM, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES AND MEMBER, MACT-15, BENGALURU (SCCH-15), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶26

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

¶27

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA

¶28

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶29

This appeal is filed by the appellant/claimant under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 challenging the judgment and award dated 21.08.2024 passed in MVC.No.95/2021 on the file of the learned XIII Additional Small Causes Judge ACJM Court of Small Causes and Member MACT-

¶30

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:19443 MFA No. 6700 of 2025

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

15, Bengaluru (SCCH-15), seeking enhancement of

¶33

compensation.

¶34

Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for respondent No.3/Insurance Company. The ranks of the parties are retained as per Tribunal for the sake of convenience.

¶35

The petitioner/injured claimant met with an accident on 16.11.2020 and filed petition before the Tribunal for compensation of Rs.10,00,000/-. The Tribunal considering the entire evidence on record granted an amount of Rs.3,31,570/- 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 she was admitted in the hospital as an inpatient for 3 days. She sustained various injuries and also examined the doctor as PW3 and he assessed the disability of 35% to the right arm and 12% to the whole body. But the Tribunal erred in taking the same as 6%. The Tribunal granted meager amounts under the other heads and the interest is to be granted at the

¶36

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:19443 MFA No. 6700 of 2025

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

higher rate and thus, requested for enhancement of compensation.

¶39

Though the petitioner stated that he was working in a private company and earning Rs.30,000/- per month, she has not filed any income proof. As she met with an accident in the year 2020, the Tribunal has rightly considered her notional income as Rs.14,500/- per month. The claimant was aged 23 years and the relevant multiplier is '18'. Ex.P8 is the wound certificate and Ex.P17 is the discharge summary. The petitioner also examined a doctor as PW3 and he is an orthopedic surgeon, he stated that the petitioner sustained right wrist distal radius fracture with inter-articular extension. He was treated at Kanva Sri Sai Hospital with ORIF for the right distal radius with LCP, she was regular follow up in the same hospital and the fracture united. The petitioner now complains of pain, stiffness in the right wrist, unable to lift weights, unable to do her routine work as before. She has healed scar over the right wrist region, restricted right wrist movements that is painful. Recent X-ray of the right wrist show united distal radius fracture with implant in situ. The doctor assessed that total disability of the right arm is 35% and whole body disability is

¶40

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:19443 MFA No. 6700 of 2025

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

12%. He further stated that the claimant needs another surgery for removal of infant and the estimated cost of the surgery is thirty thousand. Therefore, this Court finds it to take 1/3^rd of 35% i.e., 12% disability for the purpose of calculation. 14,500/- X 12 X 18 X 12% =3,75,840/- is to be granted towards loss of future earning capacity. The Tribunal has granted Rs.70,150/- towards medical expenses and it is confirmed. The claimant was hospitalized for a period of 3 days, considering the nature of injuries, period of hospitalization this Court finds to grant an amount of Rs.50,000/- towards pain and suffering, Rs.25,000/- for loss of amenities, Rs.30,000/for transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges. The claimant might not have done any other work at the time of treatment, therefore, the claimant is entitled for loss of income during laid up period is 14,500/- X 3 =Rs.43,500/-. The claimant is also entitled for Rs.30,000/- towards future medical expenses.

¶43

Thus in all, compensation awarded by this Court is

¶44

as below:

¶45

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:19443 MFA No. 6700 of 2025

¶46

HC-KAR

¶47

Sl.Nos.	Particulars	Amount in Rs.
1.	Towards pain and suffering	50,000/-
2.	Medical expenses	70,150/-
3.	Future medical expenses	30,000/-
4.	Towards loss of amenities	25,000/-
5.	Towards food, nourishment and attendant charges	30,000/-
6.	Towards loss of income during laid up period	43,500/-
7.	Towards loss of future earning capacity	3,78,840/-
	Total	6,24,590,/-

¶48

Hence, the appellant-claimant is entitled for a total

¶49

compensation of Rs.6,24,590/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a.

¶50

In the result, the following order is passed:

¶51

ORDER

¶52

i. The appeal is allowed in part.

¶53

ii. The judgment and award dated 21.08.2024 passed in MVC.No.95/2021 on the file of the learned XIII Additional Small Causes Judge ACJM Court of Small Causes and Member MACT-15, Bengaluru (SCCH-15), is modified.

¶54

iii.The claimant is entitled to a sum Rs.6,24,490/- along with interest at 6% p.a., from

¶55

7 - NC: 2026:KHC:19443 MFA No. 6700 of 2025

¶56

HC-KAR

¶57

the date of petition till the date of realization, instead

¶58

of Rs.3,31,570/- granted by the tribunal.

¶59

iv.Respondent No.3/Insurance Company has already deposited the award amount before the Tribunal. Therefore, respondent No.3/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs.2,92,920/- along with the interest at the rate of

¶60

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

¶61

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

¶62

same.

¶63

Sd/(P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE

¶64

PNV

¶65

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 57

Sumaiya Saif v. Ms Global Tech Solution

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sumaiya Saif v. Ms Global Tech Solution

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

Sri. Kumarswamy Vs Sri. Dileep v

M S Kiran Vs Naveen R

Sri K Hari Prasad Vs Smt Manjula

Srinivasaiah Govindaraju Vs Ravikumar H v @ Ravikumar Hadinaru Venkataswamaiah

Darshini B K Vs Guruprasad D v

Shri Yashawantha B v Vs Shri Narasimhappa