Smt Netravathi Vs the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.

MR. N. NARASINGA RAO S/O LATE NARAYANA RAO MAJOR,NO. 407, 'D' BLOCK PARASMYTHRI APARTMENTS 6TH CROSS, ANANTHA NAGAR ELECTRONIC CITY,BENGALURU - 560 100.

¶15

…RESPONDENTS

¶16

(BY SRI. POORNABODHA RAO K, ADVOCATE)

¶17

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:15509 MFA No. 904 of 2025

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.15.11.2024 PASSED IN MVC NO.4894/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE VII ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSE JUDGE AND ACJM, MEMBER, MACT-3, BENGALURU, 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: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA

¶21

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶22

This appeal is preferred by the appellant-claimant against the award dated 15.11.2024 passed in MVC No.4894/2022 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru [for short 'Tribunal'] claiming enhancement of compensation.

¶23

2 . The claimant Netravathi met with an accident on 07.07.2022 and filed claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- towards injuries sustained by her. The Tribunal considering the evidence on record granted compensation of Rs.4,20,145/- along with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of deposit of the amount in the Tribunal. (excluding the amount of Rs.20,000/towards future medical expenses).

¶24

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:15509 MFA No. 904 of 2025

¶25

HC-KAR

¶26

Aggrieved by the said order, this instant appeal is preferred in which she mainly contended that she was aged 26 years at the time of accident and working as Tailor by earning Rs.30,000/- per month and not produced the proof of income. However, the Tribunal has taken the income of the appellant at Rs.15,500/- p.m. Further, she sustained injuries to the left clavicle fracture. PW.3doctor was examined and he assessed the disability to the left arm at 30% and 10% towards whole body and the Tribunal by considering the evidence of PW.3, injuries sustained and medical records has assessed the functional disability at 10%. Lastly, she contended that the compensation awarded under other heads are meager. Therefore, learned counsel requested for enhancement of compensation.

¶27

On contrary, learned counsel for respondents submits that PW.3 has assessed the disability at 10% to the whole body and the Tribunal has rightly considered the same. Hence, it requires no interference.

¶28

4 -

¶29

NC: 2026:KHC:15509 MFA No. 904 of 2025

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

Heard the arguments advanced by the learned

¶32

counsel for appellant and learned counsel for respondents.

¶33

The appellant is working as a Tailor and earning Rs.30,000/- per month, but she has not produced the income proof. As the petitioner met with an accident in the year 2022, her notional income is to be taken as ₹15,500/- per month as per the chart prepared by Karnataka State Legal Services Authority and the Tribunal has rightly taken the income of the appellant and this Court finds no reason to interfere. The appellant was aged 26 years. Therefore, the appropriate multiplier is '17'. Further, the appellant sustained left clavicle fracture and also examined one Dr. Nagaraj B N who is PW.3. PW.3 stated in the cross-examination that the petitioner was treated with ORIF with plate & screws on 09.07.2022 and later discharged on 11.07.2022. She said was on regular follow up in the same hospital and the fracture united. However, the appellant complains of weakness and pain in the left arm, unable to sleep on the left side,

¶34

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:15509 MFA No. 904 of 2025

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

unable to lift weights and do her routine work normally. On examination by PW.3 doctor, the appellant has healed scar over the left clavicle, palpable hardware, which is tender, restricted left shoulder movements. Further, the recent x-ray of the left clavicle shows united fracture with implant-in-situ. Therefore, this Court finds it appropriate to consider the disability at 10% which is rightly assessed by the Tribunal. Accordingly, loss of future earning capacity comes to ₹3,16,200/-. (15,500+x12x17x10%).

¶37

Further, the Tribunal has granted ₹8,445/towards medical expenses as per Ex.P12 and it needs no interference. The appellant was hospitalized for a period of 04 days. Considering the nature of injuries, her avocation, hospitalization and other relevant factors, this Court finds it reasonable to grant an amount of Rs.50,000/- towards pain and suffering, Rs.25,000/- towards loss of amenities and Rs.40,000/- for transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges. Further, the appellant might not have attended any other work at least for a period of 3 months.

¶38

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:15509 MFA No. 904 of 2025

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

As such, the compensation under the head income during laid up period comes to ₹46,500/- (15,500 x3). Lastly, the appellant is entitled for compensation amounting to Rs.40,000/- towards future medical expenses considering the nature of injuries and follow up treatment to be undergone.

¶41

Thus in all, components awarded by this Court

¶42

are as below,

¶43

Particulars	Amount in Rs.
Loss of future earning	3,16,200.00
Medical expenses	8,445.00
Pain and suffering	50,000.00
Loss of amenities	25,000.00
Transportation, special diet and attendant charges	30,000.00
Loss of income during laid up period	46,500.00
Future medical expenses	40,000.00
Total	5,16,145 .00

¶44

7 -

¶45

NC: 2026:KHC:15509 MFA No. 904 of 2025

¶46

HC-KAR

¶47

Compensation is enhanced from Rs.4,20,145/-

¶48

to ₹5,16,145/- and the enhanced compensation is ₹ 96,000/-, which carries interest at the rate of 6% per annum. Further, the insurance company has already deposited the award amount before the Tribunal.

¶49

In the result, the following order is passed:

¶50

ORDER

¶51

i. The appeal is allowed in part .

¶52

ii. The judgment and award dated 15.11.2024 passed in MVC No.4894/2022, by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru, is modified;

¶53

iii. Respondent No.1 is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs.96,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum within one month from the date of this order on such deposit and

¶54

NC: 2026:KHC:15509 MFA No. 904 of 2025

¶55

HC-KAR

¶56

8 -

¶57

iv. Appellant-claimant is permitted to withdraw the entire compensation with interest accrued on it.

¶58

Sd/(P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE

¶59

SSD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5

Smt Netravathi v. the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Netravathi v. the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.

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

Punith Vs H. R. Kanthegowda

Sri. v. L. Siddaiah Vs Sri. Gangaraju. M. B

Smt. Devika @ Geetha Vs Sri Arun

Sri Ningappa Vs Babu Gurupad Biradar

Shriram General Insurance Company Ltd., Vs Sri C S Madegowda

Sri Ganesh Poojary Vs Sri Madhuka S Kundar