Smt Pushpa Vs Sri Santhosh P C — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2026)

Smt Pushpa Vs Sri Santhosh P C — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Miscellaneous First Appeal allowed in part; the Tribunal's judgment and award dated 06.07.2013 in MVC No.440/2011 modified; claimant entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.2,40,886/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization (instead of Rs.75,000/-); respondent No.2 - Insurance Company, having already deposited the earlier awarded amount, directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs.1,65,886/- with 6% interest within one month, on which the claimant may withdraw the entire amount with accrued interest; no interest for the delayed period of 395 days.

Issue for consideration

Whether the compensation of Rs.75,000/- granted by the Tribunal was adequate and required enhancement under the several heads (loss of future earning capacity, pain and suffering, loss of amenities, transportation and extra nourishment, loss of income during laid-up period, medical expenses), including fixation of notional income and multiplier. +1 more

Court's answer

Notional income fixed at Rs.6,500/- per month as per the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority chart, the claimant being a tailor earning Rs.8,000/- per month who filed no income proof and met with the accident in 2011.

Ratio / Principle

Multiplier of '18' adopted as the claimant was aged 24 years.

Key takeaways

The respondents' argument that there is no disability because the fracture occurred to an ornamental bone (clavicle) is not accepted.ratio¶9
Permanent disability taken as 10% of the whole body (as against the Doctor's 20%), the claimant having admittedly sustained two fracture injuries.ratio¶10
Loss of Future Earning Capacity computed as Rs.6,500/- X 12 X 18 X 10% = Rs.1,40,400/-.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Motor Vehicles Act, S.173(1) - Enhancement of compensation - Injury claim - Claimant, a tailor, sustained inter alia fracture of upper left central incisor and painful/tender right clavicular region injury; PW.2 Doctor assessed 20% functional deficiency to the whole body. Tribunal (Addl. Senior Civil Judge & CJM & MACT, Mandya) had granted global compensation of Rs.75,000/- at 9% interest. Held: respondents' plea that a clavicular fracture, being to an 'ornamental bone', attracts no disability rejected; disability fixed at 10% as claimant admittedly sustained two fracture injuries; notional income taken as Rs.6,500/- p.m. per Karnataka State Legal Services Authority chart (no income proof filed) with multiplier 18 for age 24. Recomputed heads: Loss of Future Earning Capacity Rs.1,40,400/- (6,500 x 12 x 18 x 10%); Pain and Suffering Rs.30,000/-; Loss of Amenities Rs.20,000/-; Transportation and Extra Nourishment Rs.20,000/-; Loss of Income during Laid-Up period Rs.26,000/- (about four months); Medical Expenses Rs.4,486/- - total Rs.2,40,886/- with interest at 6% p.a. Appeal allowed in part; award modified; insurer (R2) to deposit enhanced Rs.1,65,886/- within one month; no interest for 395 days' delay in filing.

NC: 2026:KHC:35116 MFA No. 8510 of 2014

1 -

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF JULY, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 8510 OF 2014 (MV-

I)

BETWEEN:

SMT PUSHPA W/O BASAVARAJU, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, RESIDING AT 4^TH CROSS, HOSA, MANDYA TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT, MANDYA - 571 401

…APPELLANT

(BY SRI. SHRIPAD V SHASTRI.,ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed by PADMASHREE SHEKHAR DESAI

Location: High Court of Karnataka

SRI SANTHOSH P C S/O CHANDRASHEKAR, PANAKANAHALLY VILLAGE, KONANAHALLY POST, KASABA HOBL,I, MANDYA TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 401

THE BRANCH MANAGER UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO., LTD., NO.1119/B, M.C. ROAD, MANDYA, MANDYA - 571 401 …RESPONDENTS (BY R-1 IS SERVED, BUT UNREPRESENTED;

SRI. A M VENKATESH.,ADVOCATE FOR R2)

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:35116 MFA No. 8510 of 2014

HC-KAR

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 6.7.2013 PASSED IN MVC NO.440/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, CJM, MACT, MANDYA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA

ORAL JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the appellant/injured claimant under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 challenging the judgment and award dated 06.07.2013 passed in MVC.No.440/2011 on the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge and C.J.M., and M.A.C.T., Mandya, seeking enhancement of compensation.

The injured claimant met with an accident on 10.07.2011 and filed claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.5,58,000/-. The Tribunal considering the entire evidence on record, granted global compensation of Rs.75,000/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum.

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:35116 MFA No. 8510 of 2014

HC-KAR

Aggrieved by the said order, the

appellant/claimant preferred an appeal and mainly contended that she sustained two fracture injuries. She was working as tailor, earning Rs.8,000/- per month and the Doctor has assessed 20% disability of the whole body.

But, the amounts granted by the Tribunal under the other heads are meager. Thus, she requested for enhancement of compensation.

Heard the arguments of learned counsel for both side.

PW.2 - Doctor, who was examined the

appellant/claimant, in his evidence stating that the appellant/claimant sustained the following injuries:

1) Fracture of upper left central incisor

2) Laceration of inner aspect of lower lip

3) Grazed abrasion present over medical

malleolar region of left side, dorsum of lateral three toes of right foot.

4 -

NC: 2026:KHC:35116 MFA No. 8510 of 2014

HC-KAR

4) Pain with tenderness over right clavicular region with limited movements as shoulder joint

The injury Nos.1 and 4 are grievous in nature and injury Nos.2 and 3 are simple in nature.

PW.2 - Doctor further stated in his evidence that " again the petitioner came back on 03.09.2012 with complain of swelling in upper teeth. OPG revealed root canal tree upper central incisor. Recently also he has examined on 15.04.2013 and found that root canal treatment has be repeated and the dental prosthesis has to be replaced and cost will be upto Rs.20,000/-. Further PW.2 stated that petitioner has got 20% functional deficiency to the whole body ."

Learned counsel for the respondents submits that as appellant/claimant sustained fractures of clavicular, which is an ornamental bone, the disability assessed by the Doctor to an extent of 20% of the whole body is excessive. Learned counsel further submits that the

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:35116 MFA No. 8510 of 2014

HC-KAR

Tribunal already granted reasonable compensation and the

same needs to be confirmed.

Though the appellant/claimant working as a tailor,

earning Rs.8,000/- per month, she has not filed any income proof. As she met with an accident in the year 2011, this Court finds that it is just and reasonable to take her notional income as Rs.6,500/- per month as per the chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. As she was aged 24 years, the multiplier is to be taken as '18'. The appellant/claimant has filed Ex.P5 - Wound Certificate, Ex.P6 - Charge Sheet, Ex.P8 - Prescriptions, Ex.9 - old OP Slip, Exs.P10 and 11 - 2 recent OP Slips and Ex.P12 - Recent X-ray. The argument of the learned counsel for the respondents is that, there is no disability as the fracture occurred to the ornamental bone is not accepted.

Admittedly, the appellant herein sustained two fracture injuries. Therefore, this Court finds that it is just

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:35116 MFA No. 8510 of 2014

HC-KAR

and reasonable to take the disability as 10%. Therefore,

the Loss of Future Earning Capacity comes to

Rs.6,500/- X 12 X 18 X 10% = Rs.1,40,400/- .

Considering her age, occupation, nature of injuries sustained by her and other relevant factors, this Court finds that it is just and reasonable to grant an amount of Rs.30,000/- towards Pain and Suffering ,

Rs.20,000/- towards Loss of Amenities and Rs.20,000/- towards Transportation and Extra

Nourishment charges .

The appellant/claimant might not have attended any other work at least for a period of four(4) months. Therefore, she is entitled for Rs.26,000/- under the head Loss of Income during Laid-Up period .

The appellant/claimant produced the medical bills of Rs.4,486/-. Therefore, she is entitled for Rs.4,486/- towards Medical Expenses.

7 - NC: 2026:KHC:35116 MFA No. 8510 of 2014

HC-KAR

Thus, the appellant/claimant is entitled for

compensation as here under:

Particulars Amount
in Rs.
Loss of Future Earning 1,40,400.00
Capacity
Pain and Suffering 30,000.00
Loss of Amenities 20,000.00
Transportation and extra 20,000.00
nourishment charges
Loss of income during laid 26,000.00
up period
Medical expenses 4,486.00
Total 2,40,886.00

Hence, the appellant/claimant is entitled for a

total enhanced compensation of Rs.2,40,886/- along

with interest at the rate of 6% per annum.

In the result, the following order is passed:

ORDR

i) The Miscellaneous Fist Appeal is allowed

in-part .

8 - NC: 2026:KHC:35116 MFA No. 8510 of 2014

HC-KAR

ii) The judgment and award dated 06.07.2013 passed in MVC.No.440/2011 on the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge and C.J.M., and M.A.C.T., Mandya, is modified.

iii) The appellant/claimant is entitled for a sum of Rs.2,40,886/- along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum instead of Rs.75,000/- granted by the Tribunal from the date of petition till realization.

iv) Respondent No.2 - Insurance Company has already deposited the awarded compensation amount before the Tribunal. Therefore, respondent No.2 is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs.1,65,886/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum within a period of one(1) month from the date of this order.

9 -

NC: 2026:KHC:35116 MFA No. 8510 of 2014

HC-KAR

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

It is made clear that the appellant/claimant is not entitled to interest for the delayed period of 395 days.

Sd/(P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE

PHM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29