Smt K P Neema Vs Sri Shivakumar H

SMT. K.P. NEEMA W/O SRI. K.P. POONACHA, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/AT SUVARNA SANKEERNA, K.S.R.P. POLICE QUARTERS, D BLOCK, VENKATAPURA, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU-560 034.

¶16

…APPELLANT

¶17

(BY SRI. NAIK KRISHNA VENKATRAMAN, ADVOCATE)

¶18

AND:

¶19

SRI. SHIVAKUMAR H. MAJOR, S/O SRI. HUCHAIAHA, NO.72, PREETHAM POWER SOLUTION, LALBAGH FORT ROAD, NEAR LALBAGH MAIN GATE, BENGALURU – 560 004.

¶20

NC: 2026:KHC:12990 MFA No. 8582 of 2024 C/W MFA No. 8587 of 2024

¶21

2 -

¶22

HC-KAR

¶23

THE MANAGER,

¶24

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., NO.9/2, 2^ND MOTOR, T.P. HUB, MAHALAKSHMI CHAMBERS, M.G. ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001.

¶25

…RESPONDENTS

¶26

(BY SRI. C.R. RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2;

¶27

V/O DT: 23.10.2025 NOTICE TO R1 IS D/W)

¶28

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 09.09.2024 PASSED IN MVC NO.6563/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE CHIEF JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MEMBER, PRL. MACT, BENGALURU SCCH-1, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶29

IN MFA NO. 8587/2024

¶30

BETWEEN:

¶31

MASTER. YASHAS NACHAPPA AGED ABOUT 17 YEARS, S/O SRI. POONACHA K.P. SINCE MINOR REPRESENTING BY MOTHER & NATURAL GUARDIAN SMT. K.P. NEEMA, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, W/O SRI. K.P. POONACHA, R/O SUVARNA SANKEERANA, K.S.R.P POLICE QUARTERS, D BLOCK, VENKATAPPA, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU-34.

¶32

...APPELLANT

¶33

(BY SRI. NAIK KRISHNA VENKATRAMAN, ADVOCATE)

¶34

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:12990 MFA No. 8582 of 2024 C/W MFA No. 8587 of 2024

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

AND:

¶37

SRI. SHIVAKUMAR H. MAJOR, S/O SRI. HUCHAIAHA, NO.72, PREETHAM POWER SOLUTION, LALBAGH FORT ROAD, NEAR LALBAGH MAIN GATE, BENGALURU – 560 004.

¶38

THE MANAGER

¶39

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. NO.9/2, 2^ND MOTOR, T.P. HUB, MAHALAKSHMI CHAMBERS, M.G. ROAD, BENGALURU- 560 001.

¶40

...RESPONDENTS

¶41

(BY SRI. C.R. RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2; V/O DT: 17.01.2025 NOTICE TO R1 IS D/W)

¶42

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.09.09.2024 PASSED IN MVC NO.6564/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE CHIEF JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MEMBER, PRL. MACT, BENGALURU, (SCCH-1), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶43

THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY,

¶44

JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶45

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA

¶46

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:12990 MFA No. 8582 of 2024 C/W MFA No. 8587 of 2024

¶47

HC-KAR

¶48

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶49

In MFA No.8582/2024

¶50

This appeal is filed by the appellant/claimant under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 challenging the judgment and award dated 09.09.2024 in MVC No.6563/2016 (common award in MVC No.6563/2016 c/w MVC No.6564/2016 and MVC No.6565/2016) on the file of Chief Judge, Court of Small Causes, Member, Prl. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at Bengaluru, seeking enhancement of compensation.

¶51

Heard the arguments of learned counsel on both

¶52

sides. The ranks of the parties are retained as per Tribunal for the sake of convenience.

¶53

Brief facts of the case are that, injured claimant met with accident on 03.07.2016 at 2.00 p.m., the petitioner was travelling in a car bearing No.KA-41-TR-0530, drove by respondent No.1 from Koramangala towards Kabbalamma temple near Begur bridge, when dog came across the road lost control and dashed to the side grill, caused injuries to the petitioner. She filed claim petition claiming compensation of

¶54

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:12990 MFA No. 8582 of 2024 C/W MFA No. 8587 of 2024

¶55

HC-KAR

¶56

Rs.5,00,000/-. Tribunal considering the entire evidence on record granted an amount of Rs.77,960 with current and future interest at the rate of 6% per annum. Aggrieved by the said award, she preferred an appeal.

¶57

Learned counsel for the appellant mainly contented that she was aged 33 years working as a Receptionist and earning Rs.20,000/- per month. The Tribunal has granted interest at the rate of 6% and ought to have granted at the rate of 12% and the amounts granted under other heads are meagre.

¶58

Learned counsel for respondent No.2-Insurance

¶59

Company opposes that she has not examined the doctor, as such, the question of granting of amount under the head loss of future earning capacity does not arise.

¶60

As per the Wound certificate, discharge summary,

¶61

photos, case file shows that the petitioner sustained the following injuries:

¶62

"Left elbow laceration, dorsal aspect, grazed abrasion over forehead"

¶63

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:12990 MFA No. 8582 of 2024 C/W MFA No. 8587 of 2024

¶64

HC-KAR

¶65

She took conservative treatment at B.G.S. Global hospital as an inpatient fro a period of 5 days i.e., from 03.07.2016 to 08.07.2016.

¶66

The Tribunal considered all the aspects and granted an amount of Rs.77,960/-. Petitioner has filed her salary certificate in which, it was mentioned that she was getting a salary of Rs.17,000/- per month and the petitioner has sustained injuries and remained absent for a period of 26 days. Tribunal has granted an amount of Rs.34,000/- towards loss of income during laid up period for a period of two months and the same is confirmed.

¶67

Considering the nature of injuries, this Court finds it reasonable to grant an amount of Rs.30,000/- for pain and suffering, Rs.25,000/- for loss of amenities, Rs.30,000/- for transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges and Rs.5,960/- towards medical bills and the said amount is confirmed.

¶68

Thus in all, compensation awarded by this Court is as below:

¶69

7 -

¶70

NC: 2026:KHC:12990 MFA No. 8582 of 2024 C/W MFA No. 8587 of 2024

¶71

HC-KAR

¶72

Sl.No.	Particulars	Amount in Rs.
1.	Towards pain and suffering	30,000/-
2.	Towards medical bills	5,960/-
3.	Towards loss of amenities	25,000/-
4.	Towards transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges	30,000/-
5.	Towards loss of income during laid up period	34,000/-
	Total	1,24,960/-

¶73

Hence, the appellant-claimant is entitled for a total

¶74

compensation of Rs.1,24,960/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization.

¶75

In the result, the following order is passed:

¶76

ORDER

¶77

i. The appeal is allowed in part.

¶78

ii. The judgment and award dated 09.09.2024 passed in MVC No.6563/2016 on the file of the Chief Judge, Court of Small Causes and

¶79

8 - NC: 2026:KHC:12990 MFA No. 8582 of 2024 C/W MFA No. 8587 of 2024

¶80

HC-KAR

¶81

Member, Principal MACT, Bangalore, is modified.

¶82

iii. The claimant is entitled to a sum of Rs. 1,24,960/- along with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization, instead of Rs.77,960/- granted by the Tribunal.

¶83

iv. Respondent No.2/Insurance Company has already deposited the award amount before the Tribunal. Therefore, respondent No.2 / Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs.47,000/- along with the interest at the rate of 6% within one month from the date of this order.

¶84

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

¶85

In MFA No.8587/2024

¶86

This appeal is filed challenging the judgment and award dated 09.09.2024 in MVC No.6564/2016 (common award in MVC No.6563/2016 c/w MVC No.6564/2016 and MVC

¶87

9 - NC: 2026:KHC:12990 MFA No. 8582 of 2024 C/W MFA No. 8587 of 2024

¶88

HC-KAR

¶89

No.6565/2016) on the file of Chief Judge, Court of Small Causes, Member, Prl. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at Bengaluru, seeking enhancement of compensation.

¶90

Heard the arguments of learned counsel on both

¶91

sides. The ranks of the parties are retained as per Tribunal for the sake of convenience.

¶92

The injured claimant met with accident on 03.07.2016 and filed claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.15,00,000/-. The Tribunal considering the entire evidence on record granted an amount of Rs.1,47,269/- with current and future interest at the rate of 6% per annum. Aggrieved by the said award, he preferred an appeal.

¶93

Learned counsel for the appellant mainly contented

¶94

that the petitioner was aged 9 years at the time of accident. He sustained the following grievous injuries:

¶95

"Suffered traumatic brain injury, Facio Maxillary fracture, base of skull fractures, traumatic CSF Rhinorrhoea, Facial degloving injury, head injurty fractures of left clavicle, fractures of right zygomatic arch and left occipital bone".

¶96

10 - NC: 2026:KHC:12990 MFA No. 8582 of 2024 C/W MFA No. 8587 of 2024

¶97

HC-KAR

¶98

He was hospitalised for 17 days, took treatment at B.G.S.Global hospital from 03.07.2016 to 20.06.2016. He examined two doctors as PW.4 and PW.5, who assessed the permanent neurological disability at 32% to whole body and 15% facial disability. Tribunal granted meagre compensation under the other heads and thus, requested for enhancement of compensation.

¶99

PW4 stated that he sustained head injury and had lost consciousness. He also has Facio maxillary injuries along with nasal bleed. At admission he was deeply unconscious and gasping for breath. He was immediately intubated and was connected to a mechanical ventilator. CT scan of the brain revealed cerebral edema, right zygomatic arch fracture, right temporal bone fracture, left occipital bone fracture and maxillary sinus fracture along with pneumocephalus. He has transient CSF leak form nose which subsided with treatment. He was discharged on 20/07/16. At discharge, he was conscious and had 3^rd and 6^th nerve paresis. He assessed the total disability as 32% pertaining to the whole body and it is permanent damage.

¶100

11 - NC: 2026:KHC:12990 MFA No. 8582 of 2024 C/W MFA No. 8587 of 2024

¶101

HC-KAR

¶102

PW5 is a Consultant Plastic Surgeon stated that at the time of admission, he was deeply unconscious and gasping for breath. He was immediately intubated and was connected to a mechanical ventilator. CT scan of the brain revealed cerebral edema, right zygomatic arch fracture, right temporal bone fracture, left occipital bone fracture and maxillary sinus fracture along with pneumosephalus. Plastic surgery reference for the complex right sided facial wound was sought on 04.06.2016. He has partially sutured mouth over the right zygomatic and temple region with loss of skin over the right lower lid. He underwent debridement and closure of facial wound with local skin transposition for the right lower lid defect. He stated that there is double vision, pulled lower lid with exposed conjunctiva and assessed the total facial disability as 15%.

¶103

The counsel for the appellant stated that he

¶104

sustained 47% disability but the Tribunal has not considered disability and granted meagre amounts.

¶105

Considering the evidence of both the doctors said.

¶106

This Court finds it reasonable to take the disability as 20%. As

¶107

12 - NC: 2026:KHC:12990 MFA No. 8582 of 2024 C/W MFA No. 8587 of 2024

¶108

HC-KAR

¶109

per the citation reported in so and so, As per the judgment of this Court in the case of New India Assurance Company Limited v. Abdul S/o Mehaboob Tahasildar in MFA No.103807/2016 , it was held that when the disability is more than 20%, he is entitled for future prospectus but in this case the disability is only taken as 20%, so the appellant is not entitled for future prospects. He met with an accident in the year 2016 and his notional income is to be considered as per the chart prepared by Karnataka State Legal Services Authority and it comes to Rs.9,500/- per month. Since he was below 15 years of age, the applicable multiplier is ‘15’.

¶110

Learned counsel for respondent No.2/Insurance Company argued that the income of the petitioner cannot be considered, as he was only 9 years old at the time of the accident and permitting such assessment would be contrary to the constitutional provisions prohibiting child labour.

¶111

The petitioner/injured sustained grievous injuries; as per the medical evidence, the disability was assessed to the extent of 47%. This Court finds it reasonable to take the notional income as per the chart. The Hon’ble Supreme Court

¶112

13 - NC: 2026:KHC:12990 MFA No. 8582 of 2024 C/W MFA No. 8587 of 2024

¶113

HC-KAR

¶114

has stated that claimants cannot come to the Court repeatedly for compensation in cases of composite disability and the Court must consider all relevant factors and grant reasonable compensation. Therefore, this Court finds it reasonable to grant a sum of Rs.3,42,000/- (9,500 × 12 × 15 × 20%) under the head of loss of future earning capacity. The petitioner was hospitalized for a period of 17 days. The Tribunal awarded Rs.27,269/- towards medical expenses, as the other amount incurred by him was already reimbursed by the Insurance Company and the said amount is confirmed. Considering the age of the petitioner, nature of injuries and period of hospitalization, this Court finds it reasonable to award a sum of Rs.30,000/- towards transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.60,000/- towards pain and suffering and Rs.40,000/- towards loss of amenities and the same is confirmed.

¶115

Thus in all, compensation awarded by this Court is

¶116

as below:

¶117

14 - NC: 2026:KHC:12990 MFA No. 8582 of 2024 C/W MFA No. 8587 of 2024

¶118

HC-KAR

¶119

Sl.Nos.	Particulars	Amount in Rs.
1.	Towards pain and suffering	60,000/-
2.	Towards medicine expenses	27,269/-
3.	Towards loss of amenities	40,000/-
4.	Towards transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges	30,000/-
5.	Towards loss of future earning capacity	3,42,000/-
	Total	4,99,269/-

¶120

Hence, the appellant-claimant is entitled for a total

¶121

compensation of Rs.4,99,269/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a.

¶122

In the result, the following order is passed:

¶123

ORDER

¶124

i. The appeal is allowed in part.

¶125

ii. The judgment and award dated 09.09.2024 passed in MVC No.6564/2016 on the file of the Chief Judge, Court of Small Causes and Member, Principal MACT, Bangalore, is modified.

¶126

NC: 2026:KHC:12990 MFA No. 8582 of 2024 C/W MFA No. 8587 of 2024

¶127

HC-KAR

¶128

15 -

¶129

iii. The claimant is entitled to a sum of Rs.4,99,269/- along with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization, instead of Rs.1,47,269/- granted by the Tribunal.

¶130

iv. Respondent No.2/Insurance Company has already deposited the award amount before the Tribunal. Therefore, respondent No.2/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs.3,52,000/- along with the interest at the rate of 6% within one month from the date of this order.

¶131

v. On such deposit, the mother of the petitioner being his natural guardian is permitted to withdraw the entire amount along with interest accrued on the same.

¶132

Sd/- (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE

¶133

PSJ/AMA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 75

Smt K P Neema v. Sri Shivakumar H

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt K P Neema v. Sri Shivakumar H

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mrs Hemalatha P K Vs the Managing Director

Sri Puttaswamy M a Vs M/S Cholamandalam M S

Sri Lakshmikant Vs Sri Venkateshappa

Shri. Bharani. C Vs Royal Sundaram General Insurance Company Ltd.

Sri. Abhishek. K @ Abhishek Vs Smt. Savitha

Shri Harish G R Vs Shri K M Lokesh