Partly allowed

Sri Y M Nagaraju v. M/S Bharati Axa Gen Ins Co. Ltd.

Karnataka HC18 Mar 2026MFA/7045/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Claimant injured in a road traffic accident appealed for enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. The Court confirmed medical expenses, added amounts for pain and suffering, loss of amenities, attendant charges and laid-up income, and enhanced compensation to Rs.2,50,606/- with interest.

What did the court decide?

Enhanced compensation of Rs.1,10,500/- with 6% interest from date of petition, to be deposited by respondent-insurer within one month and withdrawn by the claimant.

Sri Y M Nagaraju Vs M/S Bharati Axa Gen Ins Co. Ltd. — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

1 - NC: 2026:KHC:15891 MFA No. 7045 of 2025

¶2

HC-KAR

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 7045 OF 2025 (MV-I)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI Y M NAGARAJU S/O MUNIVENKATAIAH AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS RESISDING AT NO.30/2, 'C' STREET, 1^st MAIN ROAD, NEW GUDDADAHALLI MYSORE ROAD, BENGALURU- 560 026.

¶9

…APPELLANT

¶10

(BY SRI. GURUDEVA PRASAD K T., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

M/S BHARATI AXA GEN INS CO LTD BY ITS MANAGER Digitally 1ST FLOOR, FERNS ICON, signed by CHAITHANYA SURVEY NO.28, K DODANAKUNDI VILLAGE, Location: K R PURAM HOBLI, HIGH COURT BENGALURU- 560 037 OF KARNATAKA

¶13

SRI RAMACHANDRA S/O VENKATARAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS R/AT RAMASAGARA VILLAGE, HAROHALLI HOBLI, KANAKAPURA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-562 159.

¶14

…RESPONDENTS

¶15

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:15891 MFA No. 7045 of 2025

¶16

HC-KAR

¶17

(BY SRI. MALLIKARJUNAREDDY N.A., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. B. PRADEEP., ADVOCATE FOR R1;

¶18

V/O DATED 23/9/25 NOTICE TO R2 IS D/W)

¶19

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT. 02.05.2025 PASSED IN MVC NO. 3329/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE IV ADDITIONAL JUDGE AND MACT AND ACJM, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, ACJM, BENGALURU (SCCH-6), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶20

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, 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 appellants/claimants

¶25

under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, challenging the judgment and award dated 02.05.2025 passed in MVC No.3329/2011 by the IV Additional Judge and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and ACJM, Court if

¶26

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:15891 MFA No. 7045 of 2025

¶27

HC-KAR

¶28

Small Causes, Bengaluru (SCCH-6), (for short, 'the Tribunal') seeking enhancement of compensation.

¶29

The injured claimant met with a road traffic accident on 01.05.2011 and filed a claim petition seeking compensation of Rs.10,00,000/-. The Tribunal, after considering the oral and documentary evidence on record, awarded a total compensation of Rs.1,40,106/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization.

¶30

Aggrieved by the said award, the claimant has preferred this appeal contending that he sustained grievous injuries and was hospitalized as an inpatient for a period of 18 days. However, the Tribunal granted meager amounts under various heads. It is further contended that the claimant, aged 46 years, was working as a contractor at BWSSB, Bangalore and earning Rs.10,00,000/- per annum , but the Tribunal wrongly assessed his notional income at 6,500/- per month. Though he incurred about Rs.2,00,000/- towards medical expenses, the Tribunal

¶31

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:15891 MFA No. 7045 of 2025

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

awarded only Rs.55,606/- under that head. It is also contended that the Tribunal has not granted any amount towards loss of income during the laid-up period or towards future medical expenses and that interest ought to have been granted at the rate of 12% per annum. Therefore, the claimants requested for enhancement of compensation.

¶34

The appellant was a contractor and produced Ex.P.7-certificate of tax deduction. Exs.P.10, P.12 and Ex.P-13 indicate that he was a registered contractor with BWSSB during the period 2008 and 2010. As per Ex.P.14 and Form No.16A, the tax deducted for the years 2007-08 and 2010-11 is shown. The petitioner paid Rs.13,663/- for the year 2008 and Rs.14,216/- for the year 2011 towards tax. The Tribunal observed that Exs.P.14 and P.15 clearly show deduction of tax. However, the amount received by him as a contractor includes expenses towards labour and materials and he has not clearly stated his monthly or annual income. Accordingly, the Tribunal assessed his

¶35

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:15891 MFA No. 7045 of 2025

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

income notionally. It was further observed that since he continued his employment even after the accident, no amount was awarded under the head of loss of future earning capacity.

¶38

As per Ex.P.6-wound certificate, the appellant

¶39

sustained an acromioclavicular joint fracture with dislocation, which is grievous in nature. The appellant also examined the doctor as PW-2 and he stated that the appellant sustained an acromioclavicular joint fracture with dislocation, along with pain and swelling over the right shoulder. Initially, he was treated conservatively with POP and was advised to use an arm pouch and was discharged on 02.05.2011. Subsequently, he was re-examined in the OPD on 05.05.2011 due to server pain and deformity in the right shoulder. Upon examination, surgery was planned as the fracture had not united. On 09.05.2011, ORIF with hook plate and ligament reconstruction was performed. Further, manipulation of screws with K-wire fixation was done on 13.05.2011 and he was discharged

¶40

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:15891 MFA No. 7045 of 2025

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

on 23.05.2011. PW-2 assessed the permanent physical disability at 16%. He also stated that at the time of discharge, the patient was stable and the fracture had united.

¶43

As per Exs.P.18, P.19 and P.20, the Tribunal

¶44

awarded an amount of Rs.55,606/- towards medical expenses, which is hereby confirmed.

¶45

Considering the nature of injures, the period of hospitalisation and other relevant factors, this Court finds it reasonable to grant an amount of Rs.75,000/- towards 'pain and suffering', Rs.30,000/towards 'loss of amenities' and Rs.40,000/- towards 'transportation, extra nourishment and attended charges'.

¶46

The appellant might not have attended any other work at least for a period of two months. As he is working as a contractor, this Court finds it reasonable to take his income as Rs.25,000/-. Therefore, the appellant is entitled to Rs.50,000/- towards 'loss of income during the laid-up period.'

¶47

7 - NC: 2026:KHC:15891 MFA No. 7045 of 2025

¶48

HC-KAR

¶49

Since the appellant has continued in

¶50

employment even after the accident, granting of compensation under the head of loss of future earning capacity does not arise.

¶51

Thus, the compensation awarded by this Court

¶52

is as follows:

¶53

Particulars	Amount in Rs.
Painand suffering	75,000.00
Loss of amenities	30,000.00
Transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges	40,000.00
Medical expenses	55,606.00
Loss of income during laid up period	50,000.00
Total	2,50,606.00

¶54

The appellant/claimant is entitled to a total compensation of Rs.2,50,606./- as against Rs.1,40,106/awarded by the Tribunal. The enhanced compensation works out to Rs.1,10,500/-. To this extent, the award passed by the Tribunal is modified.

¶55

In the result, pass the following:

¶56

8 - NC: 2026:KHC:15891 MFA No. 7045 of 2025

¶57

HC-KAR

¶58

ORDER

¶59

i. The appeal is allowed in part.

¶60

ii. The judgment and award dated 02.05.2025 passed in MVC No.3329/2011 by the IV Additional Judge and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and ACJM, Court if Small Causes, Bengaluru (SCCH-6), is hereby modified;

¶61

iii. The appellant-claimant is entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.1,10,500/with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till its realization.

¶62

iv. Respondent No.1/Insurance Company has already deposited the awarded amount before the Tribunal. Therefore, Insurance Company is directed to deposit enhanced compensation of Rs.1,10,500/with interest rate of 6% within one month from the date of this order.

¶63

¶64

NC: 2026:KHC:15891 MFA No. 7045 of 2025

¶65

HC-KAR

¶66

v. On such deposit, the appellant/claimant is permitted to withdraw the entire amount along with interest accrued on it.

¶67

Sd/(P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE

¶68

TMP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19

Sri Y M Nagaraju v. M/S Bharati Axa Gen Ins Co. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Y M Nagaraju v. M/S Bharati Axa Gen Ins Co. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Venkatesh Vs Ankitha P

Smt. Sefiya Vs New India Assurance Company Ltd.

P Chinnanna Vs the Manager

Smt Niveditha D L Also Known as Shrianvitha D L Vs Mr L Hareesh

Smt Suma N Vs Sri Satish M v

Sri Dinesh B S Vs the Manager Universal Sompo General Ins Co. Ltd.