SMT. RENUKAMMA W/O. BASAVARAJA vs GUDADAPPA S/O. BALAPPA VADDAR,
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17846
MFA No. 102868 of 2024
CNR: KAHC020119222024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD
TH
DATED THIS THE 30 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.G.SHANTHI
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 102868 OF 2024 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
SMT. RENUKAMMA
W/O. BASAVARAJA
AGE: 49 YEARS,
TH
R/O. 25 WARD,
JAMBUNATHAHALLI,
HOSAPETE,
DIST: VIJAYANAGARA-583201.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. CHANDRASHEKHAR M. HOSAMANI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. GUDADAPPA
S/O. BALAPPA VADDAR,
AGE: 28 YEARS,
OCC: DRIVER,
R/O: BIJAKAL,
TQ: KUSTAGI,
DIST: KOPPAL-583278.
2. NOOR AHMED
S/O. PEERASAB
AGE: 28 YEARS,
OCC: BUSINESS,
TH
R/O. 25 WARD,
ESHWAR NAGARA,
HOSAPETE-583201,
DIST. VIJAYANAGARA
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17846
MFA No. 102868 of 2024
CNR: KAHC020119222024
3. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
UMAMAHESHWARA RAO BLDG,
STATION ROAD,
HOSAPETE-583201,
DIST. VIJAYANAGARA
VIDE POLICY/COVER NOTE
NO.72412003120P105132993
VALID FROM 19-08-2020 TO 18-08-2021.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. S.S. KOLIWAD, ADVOCATE;
NOTICE R1 AND R2 IS DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR
VEHICLES ACT, 1988, PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL BY
ENHANCING THE COMPENSATION BY MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT
AND AWARD OF THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC CUM
MEMBER MACT-IV HOSAPETE, DATED 06.12.2023 IN MVC
NO.715/2020 IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.G.SHANTHI
ORAL JUDGMENT
Aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 06.12.2023
in MVC No.715/2020 passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge
1
and JMFC, Cum Member MACT-IV, Hosapete , the appellant
1
For short, ‘the Tribunal’
Digitally Signed by KADAMBADI
GANESH SHANTHI on 04-11-2026
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17846
MFA No. 102868 of 2024
CNR: KAHC020119222024
being the petitioner before the Tribunal has filed this appeal
seeking enhancement of the compensation.
2. Parties are hereinafter referred to as per their ranks
before the Tribunal for the sake of convenience.
3. Brief facts of the case are that on 31.08.2020 about
3.30 p.m., when the petitioner was proceeding in a Tavera Car
2
bearing registration No.KA-33/M-4672 on NH-63 near Sathodi
Cross, Kalaghatagi, at that time, the driver of the said car
drove in a rash and negligent manner, and lost his control over
the vehicle. The said car turn turtel on the road, as a result of
which, she sustained grievous injuries. Immediately after the
accident, the petitioner was shifted to the Hospital and she has
spent huge amount towards the medical expenses.
4. The petitioner, prior to the accident was earning
Rs.25,000/- per month by doing coolie work and was the sole
earning member of her family. Due to the accidental injuries, it
is difficult for her to work and she lost her income. Accordingly,
she filed a petition claiming compensation before the Tribunal.
2
For short, ‘the car’
Digitally Signed by KADAMBADI
GANESH SHANTHI on 04-11-2026
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17846
MFA No. 102868 of 2024
CNR: KAHC020119222024
5. After filing of the claim petition, notices have been
issued to the respondents Nos.1 to 3. They appeared through
their counsel and filed their objections. The objections filed by
the respondent No.2 has been adopted by respondent No.1.
6. They denied the petition averments and admitted that
respondent No.1 was the driver and respondent No.2 was the
owner of the car. They also admitted that the driver of the car
had a valid and effective driving license, the said vehicle was
insured with respondent No.3 and the insurance policy was
valid at the time of the accident. Hence, they contended that
they are not liable to pay compensation to the petitioner and
prayed for dismissal of the claim petition against them.
7. Respondent No.3 also denied the averments made in
the claim petition and contended that the accident occurred due
to the negligence on the part of the petitioner, who was
travelling as a paid passenger beyond the vehicle’s permitted
seating capacity. It is further contended that the vehicle owner
has violated the policy conditions by carrying excess paid
passengers and that the driver did not possess a valid and
Digitally Signed by KADAMBADI
GANESH SHANTHI on 04-11-2026
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17846
MFA No. 102868 of 2024
CNR: KAHC020119222024
effective driving license for the vehicle category. Accordingly,
sought for dismissal of the claim petition.
8. Before the Tribunal, the petitioner herself examined
as PW1 and got marked the documents as Exs.P1 to P11. On
the other hand, the respondent No.3 examined its Senior
Assistant as RW1 and got marked documents as Exs.R1 to R3.
9. On hearing the arguments, the Tribunal allowed the
claim petition in part by fastening liability on the respondent
No.3/Insurance Company and awarded the compensation along
with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of
petition till realization, under the following heads:
Sl.
Heads Amount in Rs.
No.
1 Towards pain and sufferings. Rs.20,000/-
2 Loss of earning capacity. Rs.85,800/-
3 Medical expenses. Rs.6,140/-
4 Loss of amenities and Rs.5,000/-
enjoyment of life.
Total Rs.1,16,940/-
10. Aggrieved by the quantum of compensation, the
petitioner filed this appeal.
11. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the
th th th
petitioner suffered fracture of 4 , 5 and 6 ribs in the
Digitally Signed by KADAMBADI
GANESH SHANTHI on 04-11-2026
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17846
MFA No. 102868 of 2024
CNR: KAHC020119222024
accident, but the Tribunal assessed the disability only to the
extent of 4% which is on the lower side and the compensation
awarded by the Tribunal under the various heads are on lower
side. Accordingly, prayed for enhancement of the
compensation.
12. Learned counsel for the respondent/Insurance
Company argued that the doctor assessed the disability to the
extent of 20% to the particular limb and the Tribunal has
rightly assessed the disability at 4% to the whole body; the
Tribunal has rightly awarded compensation on various heads
which are adequate and reasonable. Accordingly, prayed for
dismissal of the appeal.
13. Heard the arguments. Perused the materials available
on record. The points that would arise for consideration by this
Court are as follows:
i) Whether the petitioner proves that the
compensation awarded by the Tribunal is
inadequate and it deserves to be modified?
ii) What order?
Digitally Signed by KADAMBADI
GANESH SHANTHI on 04-11-2026
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17846
MFA No. 102868 of 2024
CNR: KAHC020119222024
14. Points framed by this Court for consideration are
answered as follows:
Point No.(i) : Partly in the affirmative.
Point No.(ii) : As per the final order, for the
following:
15. Regarding Point No.(i): The petitioner met with an
accident on 31.08.2020, and has sustained grievous injuries
are not in dispute. The injuries are: i) cut lacerated wound
measuring about 7 x 0.5 cms on the right parietal area of scalp,
ii) abrasion measuring 2 x 0.5 cms on right shoulder, iii)
th th th
swelling around injury no.1 and iv) fracture of 4 , 5 and 6
ribs. PW2/the doctor assessed the disability to the extent of
15% to the particular limb.
16. The Tribunal has assessed the disability to the extent
of 4% to the whole body. On considering the documents
available on record, this Court is of the opinion that it is just
and reasonable to assess the disability to the extent of 5% .
17. According to the petitioner, she was working as a
coolie and earning Rs.25,000/- per month. But nothing material
Digitally Signed by KADAMBADI
GANESH SHANTHI on 04-11-2026
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17846
MFA No. 102868 of 2024
CNR: KAHC020119222024
evidence has been placed before the Court to prove the
income. When there is no proof of income, it is up to the
Tribunal to assess the income of the petitioner as per the
guidelines issued by the Karnataka Legal Services Authority.
Accordingly, the Tribunal has rightly taken the income of the
petitioner at Rs.13,750/- per month.
18. The petitioner born on 01.01.1975. So as on the
date of accident, she was aged about 46 years. The applicable
multiplier would be “13” . Thus, the petitioner is entitled for
compensation under the head of “loss of future income” as
below:
Rs.13,750/- X 12 X 13 X 5% = Rs.1,07,250/-
19. By looking into the injuries sustained by the
petitioner, this Court is of the opinion that it is just and
reasonable to enhance the compensation from Rs.20,000/- to
Rs.25,000/- under the head of “pain and suffering”.
20. The Tribunal has rightly awarded compensation of
Rs.6,140/- under the head of “medical expenses” and
Digitally Signed by KADAMBADI
GANESH SHANTHI on 04-11-2026
- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17846
MFA No. 102868 of 2024
CNR: KAHC020119222024
Rs.5,000/- under the head of “loss of amenities and
enjoyment of life”, which does not call for any interference.
21. The Tribunal has not awarded any compensation for
the income during laid up period. By looking into the fractures
sustained by the petitioner, this Court is of the opinion that at
least three months’ time is required for her to recover and
during that period she was not in a position to work and earn
and the said loss should be compensated. Hence, compensation
of Rs.25,000/- is awarded under the head of “loss of income
during laid up period”. In all, the compensation is awarded
under the following heads:
Sl. Amount in
Heads
No. Rs.
1 Loss of future income 1,07,250/-
2 Pain and suffering 25,000/-
3 Medical expenses 6,140/-
4 Loss of amenities and 5,000/-
enjoyment of life
5 Loss of income during laid up 25,000/-
period
Total 1,68,390/-
22. Thus, the petitioner is entitled to receive
compensation of Rs.1,68,390/- as against Rs.1,16,940/-
awarded by the Tribunal.
Digitally Signed by KADAMBADI
GANESH SHANTHI on 04-11-2026
- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17846
MFA No. 102868 of 2024
CNR: KAHC020119222024
23. Accordingly, point No.(i) is answered partly in the
affirmative.
24. Point No.(ii) : In view of the findings on point
Nos.(i), this Court proceeds to pass the following:
ORDER
(i) The appeal filed by the petitioner is allowed
in part.
(ii) The impugned judgment and award passed
by the Tribunal is modified. The petitioner is
entitled to receive compensation of
Rs.1,68,390/- as against Rs.1,16,940/-
awarded by the Tribunal.
(iii) The enhanced compensation amount shall
carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum
from the date of petition till the date of
payment.
(iv) Respondents No.2 and 3 are jointly and
severally held liable to pay compensation to
the petitioner. Further, respondent No.3
being the insurer of the car shall deposit
enhanced compensation with accrued
interest before the Tribunal within a period
Digitally Signed by KADAMBADI
GANESH SHANTHI on 04-11-2026
- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17846
MFA No. 102868 of 2024
CNR: KAHC020119222024
of six weeks from the date of receipt of
certified copy of this judgment.
(v) Draw modified award accordingly.
(vi) Registry to transmit the Trial Court Records
forthwith.
(vii) In view of disposal of this appeal, pending
applications, if any, do not survive for
consideration and the same are accordingly
disposed of.
Digitally Signed by KADAMBADI
GANESH SHANTHI on 04-11-2026
(K.G.SHANTHI)
JUDGE
SMM
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26