MR MUJAHID KHAN vs. THE MANAGER

- 1 -
NC: 2026:KHC:12795
M.F.A. No.8622/2018

HC-KAR



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU


RD
DATED THIS THE 3 DAY OF MARCH, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.8622/2018 (MV-I)


BETWEEN:

MR. MUJAHID KHAN
S/O BABUKHAN
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS
R/AT NO.12, G.H. RISALA
TUMKUR TALUK
TUMKUR DISTRICT-572 118.
…APPELLANT




Digitally signed
by RUPA V
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA

(BY SRI. MOHAMMED SHERIFF, ADV.,)

AND:

1. THE MANAGER
THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD,
T B HUB, KRUSHI BHAVAN BUILDING
6TH FLOOR, HUDSON CIRCLE
BANGALORE 01.

2. MR. PERIASWAMY .N
S/O NAGULSAMY
NO. 18/8, BAZAAR STREET
ANEKAL TOWN, ANEKAL
BENGLAURU 562106.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. B.C. SHIVANNE GOWDA, ADV., FOR R1
V/O/DTD:22.08.2024 NOTICE TO R2 IS D/W)

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 22/03/2018, PASSED IN MVC
NO.7503/2016, ON THE FILE OF THE XIX ADDITIONAL SMALL

- 2 -
NC: 2026:KHC:12795
M.F.A. No.8622/2018

HC-KAR


CAUSE JUDGE & MACT, (SCCH-17), BENGALURU, PARTLY
ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND
SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL

ORAL JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the injured claimant seeking
for higher compensation challenging the judgment and
award dated 22.03.2018 passed in MVC.No.7503/2016 by
the MACT and XIX Additional Small Causes Judge,
Bengaluru (SCCH-17), (for short 'Tribunal).


2. Though this appeal is listed for admission, with
the consent of learned counsel for the parties, it is taken
up for final disposal.


3. Smt.Ambika M., learned counsel for
Sri.Mohammed Sheriff, learned counsel appearing for the
appellant submits that the Tribunal has erred in assessing
the income of the injured appellant at Rs.8,000/- by
ignoring the oral testimony of the appellant and other

- 3 -
NC: 2026:KHC:12795
M.F.A. No.8622/2018

HC-KAR


evidence on record. It is submitted that the appellant was
carrying on a chicken vending business and was earning
more than Rs.12,000/- per month. It is further submitted
that the award of compensation under the head of loss of
income during the laid-up period and loss of future income
due to disability is required to be modified. It is also
submitted that the award of compensation under all other
heads appears to be just and proper. Hence, she seeks to
allow the appeal.


4. Per contra, Sri.B.C.Shivanne Gowda, learned
counsel for respondent No.1/insurance Company supports
the impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal and
submits that no cogent evidence was placed before the
Tribunal with regard to the income of the appellant.
Hence, assessment of the income made by the Tribunal is
just and proper. It is submitted that the Tribunal has
awarded just and fair compensation under all other heads,
which does not call for any interference. Hence, he seeks
to dismiss the appeal.

- 4 -
NC: 2026:KHC:12795
M.F.A. No.8622/2018

HC-KAR



5. I have heard the arguments of the learned
counsel appearing for the appellant, the learned counsel
for respondent No.1 and meticulously perused the material
available on record.


6. The point that arises for consideration in this
appeal is "Whether the impugned judgment and
award of the Tribunal calls for any interference?"


7. The records indicate that the appellant
sustained injuries in a road accident dated 17.06.2016 and
took treatment at M.C. Orthopedic Centre, Tumkur. The
appellant claimed that he was running a chicken centre at
Tumkur and was earning Rs.12,000/- per month.
However, no proof of income was placed before the
Tribunal. Therefore, his income is notionally reassessed at
Rs.9,500/- per month by placing reliance on the notional
income chart prepared by the KSLSA. The Tribunal
considering the nature of injuries suffered by the
appellant, has rightly assessed the disability at 6%. It is

- 5 -
NC: 2026:KHC:12795
M.F.A. No.8622/2018

HC-KAR


not in dispute that the claimant was aged about 25 years
at the time of the accident. Therefore, the appropriate
multiplier would be 18, which has been rightly considered
by the Tribunal. Hence, the appellant is entitled to
compensation under the head of loss of future income
due to disability as under:

Rs.9,500 X 12 X 18 X 6% = Rs.1,23,120/-.


8. Taking note of the treatment provided to the
appellant, I am of the considered view that the
compensation under the head of attendant charges, food
and nourishment and conveyance expenses is required to
be enhanced to Rs.10,000/-. The appellant would be
entitled to Rs.28,500/- (Rs.9,500X 3) towards the loss of
income during laid-up period. The award of compensation
by the Tribunal under the other heads remains unaltered.
For the aforementioned reasons, the appellant is entitled
to the modified compensation as under:


- 6 -
NC: 2026:KHC:12795
M.F.A. No.8622/2018

HC-KAR

Thus, the appellant-claimant shall be entitled to a
total compensation of Rs. 2,79,298 /- as against
Rs.2,50,358/- awarded by the Tribunal.


9. In the result, this Court proceeds to pass the
following:
ORDER

a) Appeal stands allowed in part .

b) The impugned judgment and award of the
Tribunal is modified to an extent that the
appellant-claimant would be entitled to a
total compensation of Rs. 2,79,298 /- as

- 7 -
NC: 2026:KHC:12795
M.F.A. No.8622/2018

HC-KAR


against Rs.2,50,358/- awarded by the
Tribunal.

c) The enhanced compensation amount shall
carry interest at the rate of 6% per
annum from the date of petition till the
date of payment.

d) The Insurance Company shall deposit the
enhanced compensation amount with
accrued interest before the Tribunal within
a period of six weeks from the date of
receipt of certified copy of this judgment.

e) On such deposit, the Tribunal shall release
the entire enhanced compensation
amount in favour of the appellant.

f) Draw modified award accordingly.


Sd/-
(VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL)
JUDGE

ABK
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22