SRI. VENKATESH vs SRI. MANJUNATHA. M

Court
Karnataka High Court

- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57178
MFA No. 2270 of 2021


CNR: KAHC010160712021



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU


TH
DATED THIS THE 09 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026


BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH


MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 2270 OF 2021

(MV-I)

BETWEEN:


1. SRI. VENKATESH,


S/O VENKATARAMAPPA,

AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,

R/AT BHAKTHRAHALLI VILLAGE

AND POST, JANGAMAKOTE HOBLI,

SHIDLAGHATTA TALUK,

CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT.

Digitally
signed by
SUSHMA
LAKSHMI B
S
Location:
High Court
of
Karnataka

…APPELLANT

(BY SRI. GURUDEV PRASAD K. T., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. SRI. MANJUNATHA M.,
AGED MAJOR,
S/O MUNIVENAKTASWAMY,
NO.245, NEAR RAILWAY GATE,
K. MALLASANDRA,

- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57178
MFA No. 2270 of 2021


CNR: KAHC010160712021


NADAVATI POST, HOSKOTE,
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT – 562 114.

2. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
TP HUB, NO.18, KRUSHI BHAVAN,
NRUPATHUNGA ROAD,
BENGALURU – 560 001.
REP. BY ITS MANAGER.

…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. S. KRISHNA KISHORE., ADVOCATE FOR R2;
V/O DATED 05.06.2026, NOTICE TO R1 IS D/W)
----
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 16.12.2020, PASSED IN
MVC.NO.3169/2019, ON THE FILE OF THE XVII ADDITIONAL
JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES AND MEMBER, M.A.C.T.,
MAYO HALL UNIT, BENGALURU, (SCCH-21), 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 S RACHAIAH

- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57178
MFA No. 2270 of 2021


CNR: KAHC010160712021


ORAL JUDGMENT


1. This appeal has been filed by the claimant/appellant
seeking enhancement of compensation, being aggrieved
by the judgment and award dated 16.12.2020 passed in
MVC No.3169/2019 on the file of the XVII Additional
Judge, Court of Small Causes and Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, Mayo Hall Unit, Bengaluru (SCCH-21), (for
short, ‘Tribunal’) wherein the Tribunal has awarded a
total compensation of Rs.23,57,724.80 ps. along with
interest at the rate of 6% per annum on Rs.14,57,724.80
ps. (excluding Rs.9,00,000/- awarded towards the
expenses of prosthesis) from the date of petition till its
realisation.

Brief facts of the case :

2. On 09/03/2019 at about 1:30 a.m., while the petitioner
was sitting in front of a Hotel at Channasandra, the driver
of the tanker bearing registration No.KA.07.C.3669, by
driving it in a rash and negligent manner, entered the
footpath and dashed against the petitioner, as a result of
which, the petitioner sustained injuries. Immediately, the

- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57178
MFA No. 2270 of 2021


CNR: KAHC010160712021


petitioner was taken to Columbia Asia Hospital,
Bengaluru, for first aid treatment, and thereafter, he was
shifted to Vydehi Hospital, Bengaluru. The appellant has
spent a lot of money for his treatment. Therefore, he filed
a claim petition before the Tribunal. The Tribunal
awarded the amount as stated supra.


3. Heard Sri Gurudev Prasad K.T., learned counsel for
appellant and Sri S. Krishna Kishore, learned counsel for
respondent No.2.


4. The submission of the learned counsel for the appellant is
that the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is
not sustainable in law and also on facts.


5. It is further submitted that the Tribunal has committed a
serious error in not granting adequate compensation
under the head of loss of future earnings, even though
the appellant had sustained permanent disability,
specifically the amputation of his leg above the knee. As
the appellant was working as a driver, his functional
disability ought to have been assessed at 100%.

- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57178
MFA No. 2270 of 2021


CNR: KAHC010160712021



6. It is further submitted that the Tribunal has not granted
adequate compensation towards loss of income during
laid-up period and also failed to award proper
compensation in respect of loss of amenities.


7. It is further submitted that the Tribunal has fastened
contributory negligence at 20% on the appellant which is
not proper. Therefore, the same is liable to be set aside
and the compensation may be modified. Making such
submissions, learned counsel for the appellant prays to
allow the appeal.


8. Per contra , learned counsel for the respondent No.2
vehemently justified the judgment and award passed by
the Tribunal and prays for dismissal of the appeal.


9. Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties
and also on perusal of the findings of the Tribunal, it is
relevant to examine the aspect of liability. The Tribunal,
while apportioning the liability, opined that the accident
occurred due to the negligence on the part of the driver
of the offending tanker bearing registration

- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57178
MFA No. 2270 of 2021


CNR: KAHC010160712021


No.KA.07.C.3669 to the extent of 80% and fixed 20%
contributory negligence on the part of the appellant,
without assigning any cogent reasons. In fact, the
offending vehicle had veered onto the footpath and
dashed against the appellant. Therefore, fixing 20%
contributory negligence on the appellant, in my
considered view, is erroneous and improper, and the
same is liable to be set aside.



10. In so far as the quantum of compensation is concerned,
the Tribunal assessed the notional income of the injured
at Rs.11,000/- per month under the head of loss of future
earnings due to permanent disability, which is on the
lower side and calls for interference. In fact, the accident
occurred in the year 2019 and the notional income as per
the guidelines issued by the Karnataka State Legal
Services Authority is Rs.14,000/- per month. The age of
the injured at the time of accident was 29 years.
Therefore, the multiplier of 17 had to be considered by
the Tribunal. Since the leg of the injured was amputated

- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57178
MFA No. 2270 of 2021


CNR: KAHC010160712021


above the knee, 100% functional disability is also to be
considered. Thus, under the head of loss of future
earnings due to permanent disability is concerned, the
calculation is as follows:
Rs.14,000 + 40% (14,000 + 5600) = 19,600 x 12 x 17 x
100% = 39,98,400/-



11. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.66,000/- towards
loss of income during the laid-up period, which is on the
lower side. Since this Court has assessed the monthly
income of the appellant at Rs.19,600/-, the compensation
payable towards loss of income during the laid-up period
is recalculated at Rs.1,17,600/-. Accordingly, the
compensation under this head is enhanced to
Rs.1,17,600/-.


12. Consequently, the award of the Tribunal is modified and
the claimant / appellant would be entitled to the
compensation as under:-

- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57178
MFA No. 2270 of 2021


CNR: KAHC010160712021


Sl.

Award amount
No.
Particulars
(in Rupees)
Tribunal
This Court
01 Loss of future earnings
due to permanent
disability
17,95,200
39,98,400
02 Pain and Sufferings 75,000
1,00,000
03 Medical expenses 60,956
60,956
20,000
25,000
04 Conveyance, food &
nourishment, attendant
charges and other
incidental expenses
05 Loss of income during 66,000
1,17,600
laid-up period
06 Loss of amenities in life 30,000
1,00,000
07 Future expenses towards 9,00,000
9,00,000
the cost of prosthesis
TOTAL
29,47,156.00
53,01,956
Less: 20% contributory
negligence
5,89,431.20
23,57,724.80

- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57178
MFA No. 2270 of 2021


CNR: KAHC010160712021


13. In the light of the observations made above, I proceed to
pass the following:-
ORDER

i) Miscellaneous First Appeal filed by the
claimant / appellant is allowed in part.

ii) The judgment and award dated
16.12.2020 passed in MVC No.3169/2019 on the file
of the XVII Additional Judge, Court of Small Causes
and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mayo Hall Unit,
Bengaluru (SCCH-21), is modified, granting
compensation of Rs.53,01,956/- (Rupees Fifty-three
Lakhs One Thousand Nine Hundred and Fifty-six
only) as against Rs.23,57,724.80 ps. awarded by the
Tribunal.

iii) The claimant is entitled to entire
compensation with interest at the rate of 6% per
annum from the date of the petition till realization.

iv) The entire compensation amount shall be
deposited by the respondent No.2 within a period of

- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57178
MFA No. 2270 of 2021


CNR: KAHC010160712021


eight weeks from the date of receipt of the certified
copy of this judgment.

v) The Tribunal is directed to release the
entire amount in favour of the claimant.

vi) The Registry is directed to communicate
the order to the Tribunal and send the records to the
Trial Court forthwith.


Sd/-
(S RACHAIAH)
JUDGE











BSS
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25