Sri Manjunath N Vs Mr. Allisab Mirji

SRI. MANJUNATH N S/O NAGARAJU, NOW AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.45, NEAR DODDAMMA TEMPLE, AMBEDKAR NAGAR, KATTIGENAHALLI, YELAHANKA, BENGALURU - 560 064.

¶10

…APPELLANT

¶11

(BY SRI. GOPAL KRISHNA N, ADVOCATE FOR SMT. SUSHMITHA G, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by PADMASHREE SHEKHAR DESAI Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶14

MR. ALLISAB MIRJI S/O HUSSEN SAB, NOW AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.13, HALLUR VILLAGE, BHANDARAHALLI POST, SAVADATTI TALUK, BELAGAVI DISTRICT - 591 117.

¶15

SRI. NAGARAJA H S/O HANUMAPPA, MAJOR IN AGE, RESIDING AT SIDDAVANA DURGA VILLAGE, CHITRADURGA TALUK AND DISTRICT - 577 501.

¶16

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:22428 MFA No. 7850 of 2024

¶17

HC-KAR

¶18

CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL

¶19

INSURANCE CO. LTD, UNIT NO.4, 9TH FLOOR(LEVEL-6), GOLDEN HEIGHTS COMPLEX, 59TH 'C' CROSS, INDUSTRIAL SUBRUB, 4TH M BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 010. REP. BY ITS MANAGER.

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SRI. H.C. BETSUR, ADVOCATE FOR R3; VIDE ORDER DATED 23.04.2026, NOTICE TO R1 AND R2 D/W)

¶22

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 02.05.2024 PASSED IN MVC NO.4735/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE XXII ADDITIONAL SCJ AND ACMM, MEMBER, MACT, BENGALURU SCCH-24, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶23

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

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA

¶25

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶26

This appeal is filed by the appellant/claimant under

¶27

Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 challenging the common judgment and award dated 02.05.2024 passed in MVC Nos.4734/2020 and 4735/2020. However, MFA

¶28

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:22428 MFA No. 7850 of 2024

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

No.7850/2024 is filed against the award passed in MVC No.4735/2020 on the file of the XXII Additional SCJ & ACMM, Member-MACT, Bengaluru, (SCCH-24), seeking enhancement of the compensation.

¶31

Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the

¶32

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.

¶33

The petitioner/injured claimant met with an accident on 18.02.2020 and filed petition before the Tribunal for compensation of Rs.15,00,000/-. The Tribunal considering the entire evidence on record granted an amount of Rs.4,17,660/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a., from the date of filing the petition till the date of realization. Being aggrieved by the said order, this appeal is filed and mainly contended that the petitioner/injured sustained a fracture of femur shaft lower third right sided. He was hospitalized as an inpatient for six days. He examined the doctor as PW.4 and he assessed the whole

¶34

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:22428 MFA No. 7850 of 2024

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

body disability at 23% and the right lower limb disability at 46%. But the Tribunal erred in taking the disability at only 8%. The amounts awarded under the other heads are meagre. Therefore, requested for enhancement of the compensation.

¶37

Learned counsel for respondent No.3 stated that the Tribunal has given reasons in paragraph No.37 for taking the disability at 8% and the same is to be confirmed.

¶38

It is stated that the petitioner was aged 18 years, working as a painter and earning Rs.25,000/- per month. But he has not filed any income proof. As he met with an accident in the year 2020, his notional income is to be taken as Rs.14,500/-, as per the chart prepared by Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. He was aged 18 years and the relevant multiplier is '18'. The petitioner has filed Ex.P.12-wound certificate, Ex.P.21-discharge summary and other medical records and has examined

¶39

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:22428 MFA No. 7850 of 2024

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

PW.4-doctor who is an orthopedic surgeon. He has stated

¶42

that the petitioner sustained the following injuries:

¶43

"a) Fracture of femur shaft lower third right sided, He underwent surgery i.e.,

¶44

a) closed reduction and internal fixation with TENS nailing on 19.02.2020.

¶45

b) under ketomine and compose with atrophine removal of implants on 08.04.2021."

¶46

The doctor verified the wound certificate and

¶47

two discharge summaries and stated that the petitioner complains of pain and difficulty in walking and climbing stairs, along with an inability to squat and sit cross-legged. On examination, the petitioner was found to be walking with pain and limping and wasting and shortening of right lower limb is seen. As per the recent X-ray, there is a malunited fracture of the shaft of the right femur. The doctor assessed the right lower limb disability at 46% and the whole body disability at 23%. It is further stated that,

¶48

as the petitioner was working as a painter, the disability comes in the way of his working. In the cross-

¶49

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:22428 MFA No. 7850 of 2024

¶50

HC-KAR

¶51

examination, the doctor stated that even at the time of second admission for removal of the implant, there was no observation regarding mal-united fracture. The Tribunal observed that as the limb disability was 46%, 1/3^rd of the same comes to 15%. But the Tribunal assessed the whole body disability at 8%. Considering the medical evidence on record, this Court finds it reasonable to take the disability as 15% instead of 8%. Accordingly, the loss of future earning capacity comes to Rs.4,69,800/- (14,500 × 12 × 18 × 15%). The Tribunal has granted a sum of Rs.68,100/- towards medical expenses and the same is confirmed. The petitioner was hospitalized as an inpatient for a period of six days. Considering the nature of injuries, period of hospitalization and other relevant factors, the Tribunal has already awarded Rs.50,000/- towards pain and suffering and it is confirmed. This Court finds it reasonable to grant Rs.30,000/- towards loss of amenities and Rs.30,000/- towards transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges. The petitioner might

¶52

7 - NC: 2026:KHC:22428 MFA No. 7850 of 2024

¶53

HC-KAR

¶54

not have attended to any other work at least for a period

¶55

of three months. Therefore, a sum of Rs.43,500/- (14,500 × 3) is awarded under the head of loss of income

¶56

during the laid-up period.

¶57

Thus in all, compensation awarded by this Court

¶58

is as below:

¶59

Sl.Nos.	Particulars	Amount in Rs.
1.	Towards pain and suffering	50,000/-
2	Towards medical expenses	68,100/-
3	Towards loss of amenities	30,000/-
4	Towards transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges	30,000/-
5	Towards loss of future earning capacity	4,69,800/-
6	Towards loss of income during laid up period	43,500/-
	Total	6,91,400/-

¶60

Hence, the appellant-claimant is entitled for a

¶61

total compensation of Rs.6,91,400/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a.

¶62

8 - NC: 2026:KHC:22428 MFA No. 7850 of 2024

¶63

HC-KAR

¶64

In the result, the following order is passed:

¶65

ORDER

¶66

i. The appeal is allowed in part.

¶67

ii. The judgment and award dated 02.05.2024 passed in MVC No.4735/2020 on the file of the XXII Additional SCJ & ACMM, MemberMACT, Bengaluru, (SCCH-24), is modified.

¶68

iii. The claimant is entitled to a sum of Rs.6,91,400/- along with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization, instead of Rs.4,17,660/granted by the tribunal.

¶69

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.2,73,740/- along with the interest at

¶70