SIDDAMMA vs CHANDRASHEKHAR
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10731
MFA No. 202370 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030087862026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
ST
DATED THIS THE 1 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BRUNGESH M
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.202370 OF 2026 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
SMT. SIDDAMMA W/O RANGAPPA KARAJOL,
AGE: 68 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE,
R/O. MUTTAGI, TQ. BASAVANA BAGEWADI,
DIST. VIJAYAPUR-586 216.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI BAPUGOUDA SIDDAPPA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
CHANDRASHEKHAR S/O BASAPPA HALLI,
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. MUTTAGI, TQ. BASAVANA BAGEWADI,
DIST. VIJAYAPURA-586 216.
…RESPONDENT
(SERVED)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S. 173(1) OF MV ACT, PRAYING TO
MODIFY THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED
27-02-2026 PASSED IN MVC NO.286/2023 ON THE FILE OF
THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND
MEMBER MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL NO.VII
VIJAYAPURA AT VIJAYAPURA AND ALLOW THIS APPEAL AND TO
ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION AMOUNT BY RS.11,52,960/-
ONLY AS CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT BEFORE THIS
HONOURABLE COURT AND ORDER FOR COSTS OF THIS APPEAL
AND ETC.
Digitally signed by
BASALINGAPPA S
D
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10731
MFA No. 202370 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030087862026
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BRUNGESH M
ORAL JUDGMENT
This appeal is preferred by the appellant -
Smt. Siddamma W/o. Rangappa Karajol, calling in
question the legality and correctness of the judgment and
award dated 27.02.2026, passed by the II Additional
Senior Civil Judge and MACT-VII, Vijayapura (hereinafter
referred to as “the Tribunal” for the sake of brevity), in
MVC No.286/2023.
2. The present appellant - Smt. Siddamma was
the petitioner, whereas, the respondent - Chandrashekar
was the respondent before the Tribunal. For the sake of
convenience and clarity and to avoid any confusion, the
parties are referred to as per their ranks assigned to them
before the Tribunal.
3. The facts giving rise to this appeal, in brief, are
as follows:
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10731
MFA No. 202370 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030087862026
The petitioner - Smt. Siddamma filed MVC
No.286/2023 seeking compensation for the injuries
sustained by her in a road traffic accident that occurred on
17.12.2022. According to the petitioner, on 17.12.2022,
she was proceeding on foot near Kannada Girls School,
Muttagi. At that time, the motorcycle bearing registration
No.KA-28/EN-2430 was being ridden by its rider in a rash
and negligent manner and at high speed and dashed
against the petitioner from behind. Due to the said
accident, the petitioner sustained grievous injuries and
was immediately shifted to Sanjeevini Hospital,
Vijayapura.
4. It is further contended that she took treatment
as an inpatient and incurred medical expenses of about
Rs.2,00,000/-. It is also averred that at the time of the
accident, the petitioner was aged about 65 years, was
doing coolie work and earning Rs.20,000/- per month.
Due to the accidental injuries, she suffered permanent
disability and lost her earning capacity. The petitioner
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10731
MFA No. 202370 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030087862026
further contended that the accident occurred solely due to
the rash and negligent riding of the offending vehicle. On
these and other formal grounds, the petitioner filed MVC
No.286/2023 seeking suitable compensation.
5. After presentation of the petition, the same was
registered and notice was issued to the respondent. The
respondent entered appearance through his advocate,
however, he did not file his written statement. The
Tribunal therefore, framed three points for consideration
and afforded an opportunity to the petitioner to adduce
evidence. The record discloses that the petitioner -
Smt. Siddamma examined herself as P.W.1. The petitioner
also examined Dr. Siddappa as P.W.2 and got marked 15
documents as Exs.P1 to P15.
6. Thereafter, the learned Tribunal heard the
arguments of the learned advocate for the petitioner and
passed the impugned judgment and award dated
27.02.2026. The Tribunal awarded a compensation of
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10731
MFA No. 202370 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030087862026
Rs.3,47,040/- together with interest at the rate of 6% per
annum from the date of the petition till realization. The
Tribunal further directed the respondent to deposit the
compensation amount within three months from the date
of the award, failing which the award would carry further
penal interest at the rate of 3% per annum from the date
of the award till realization. Questioning the correctness
of the said judgment and award, the petitioner - Smt.
Siddamma has preferred the present appeal.
7. The petitioner has preferred this appeal,
principally questioning the adequacy of the compensation
awarded by the Tribunal. It is contended by the learned
counsel for the appellant/petitioner Sri Bapugouda
Siddappa that the Tribunal has erroneously awarded a
sum of Rs.3,47,040/- as against the reasonable
compensation of Rs.15,00,000/- claimed by the
appellant/petitioner. It is further contended that the
petitioner was earning Rs.20,000/- per month by doing
coolie work and that cogent materials were placed before
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10731
MFA No. 202370 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030087862026
the Tribunal to prove her income. Notwithstanding the
same, the Tribunal has assessed the income of the
petitioner - Smt. Siddamma on the basis of the notional
income chart. Hence, it is contended that the impugned
judgment and award warrant modification by this Court.
8. It is further contended that the compensation
awarded by the Tribunal under the non-pecuniary heads
namely pain and suffering, loss of amenities in life and
loss of income during the laid-up period is on the lower
side and requires reassessment. It is also contended that
the Tribunal has awarded meagre compensation towards
food and nourishment. Hence, the petitioner seeks
suitable enhancement of the compensation under the said
heads. Amongst other formal grounds, the petitioner has
prayed for allowing the appeal and granting the reliefs
sought therein.
9. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for
the appellant/petitioner. The learned advocate for the
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10731
MFA No. 202370 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030087862026
petitioner has fairly submitted that he does not dispute the
assessment of disability made by P.W.2/Doctor or the
percentage of disability assessed by the Tribunal. The
learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the
grievance of the petitioner is confined to the inadequacy of
the compensation awarded under the non-pecuniary
heads, particularly towards pain and suffering, loss of
income during the laid-up period, food and nourishment,
loss of amenities and other incidental heads. He has
contended that the compensation awarded under the said
heads is inadequate and requires suitable enhancement.
10. The record discloses that despite service of
notice, the respondent – Chandrashekar S/o. Basappa
Halli has not entered appearance before this Court.
Hence, the matter is taken up for consideration in his
absence.
11. Ex.P12 is the Medico Legal Certificate issued by
Sanjeevini Hospital, Vijayapur which reflects the gravity
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10731
MFA No. 202370 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030087862026
and severity of the injuries sustained by the petitioner -
Smt. Siddamma. The said document shows that the
petitioner sustained a lacerated wound, i.e., a deep cut
wound measuring 2cm × 2cm × 1cm in depth. She also
sustained an abrasion over the left knee measuring 2cm ×
2cm. Further, the petitioner sustained a laceration, i.e., a
cut wound measuring 1cm × 1cm over the fourth toe of
the left foot.
12. Ex.P12 further shows that the petitioner
sustained an undisplaced fracture of the left foot, which
indicates that although there was a fracture, the fractured
bone had not moved from its original position. In the
considered opinion of this Court, with the passage of time,
the aforesaid injuries are likely to heal. However, injury
No.5 mentioned in Ex.P12 assumes significance. It shows
that the petitioner had also sustained a skull injury namely
fracture of the frontal bone, i.e., the front part of the skull
and the lesser wing of the sphenoid bone, which is
situated behind the eyeball .
- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10731
MFA No. 202370 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030087862026
13. Further, Ex.P12 reveals that the petitioner had
sustained subdural haemorrhage involving the bilateral
insular cisterns. In medical terms, this indicates bleeding
within the brain and accumulation of blood on both sides
of the brain. Such an injury is a serious and potentially
life-threatening injury. Ex.P12 also reveals that the
petitioner had sustained an axonal injury. In medical
terms, this refers to damage to the nerve fibres within the
brain which carry signals. Such an injury may result in
loss of consciousness, memory impairment and other long-
term complications.
14. Having regard to the medical meaning and
significance of the aforesaid injuries recorded in Ex.P12,
this Court is of the considered opinion that the
consequences of such injuries are serious and cannot be
viewed lightly. As stated above, the learned counsel for
the petitioner has fairly submitted that he is not disputing
the evidence of the doctor and is not seeking
enhancement of compensation by reassessing the
- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10731
MFA No. 202370 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030087862026
percentage of disability or permanent physical impairment
suffered by the petitioner - Smt. Siddamma.
15. The learned counsel further submits that the
petitioner has undergone severe pain and suffering and
during the evening of her life, she has been deprived of
several comforts and amenities which a person is
ordinarily entitled to enjoy. On these grounds, the learned
advocate for the petitioner Sri Babugouda Siddappa seeks
enhancement of compensation under the heads pain and
suffering, loss of amenities, loss of income during the laid-
up period, special diet, transportation charges and
attendant charges.
16. The record shows that the Tribunal has awarded
a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards pain and suffering and loss
of amenities in life, Rs.59,000/- towards loss of income
during the laid-up period and Rs.12,500/- towards special
diet, transportation and attendant charges.
- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10731
MFA No. 202370 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030087862026
17. In the considered opinion of this Court, the
compensation awarded towards loss of income during the
laid-up period warrants enhancement to Rs.75,000/-. The
record shows that the petitioner - Smt. Siddamma was
admitted as an inpatient from 17.11.2022 to 06.12.2022
and thus, remained in the hospital for 19 days. Having
regard to her age, it cannot reasonably be expected that
she would have resumed her normal activities and
household chores immediately after discharge from the
hospital. She would in all probability have required a
further period of rest and recuperation. Therefore, if the
compensation under this head is enhanced to Rs.75,000/-,
the same would meet the ends of justice.
18. For the foregoing reasons, this Court is also of
the opinion that the compensation awarded by the
Tribunal towards pain and suffering and loss of amenities
in a sum of Rs.50,000/- warrants enhancement to
Rs.80,000/-. Such enhancement would meet the ends of
justice.
- 12 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10731
MFA No. 202370 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030087862026
19. The record further shows that the petitioner
remained admitted in the hospital for 19 days. During this
period, her family members would have attended to her
and in the process, would have incurred expenditure
towards travelling between their residence and the
hospital. Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that a sum
of Rs.15,000 towards transportation charges would be just
and reasonable.
20. Having regard to the age of the petitioner and
the nature of the head injury sustained by her, she would
certainly have required a nutritious and special diet during
the period of treatment and recovery. Therefore, this
Court is of the considered opinion that a sum of
Rs.20,000/- towards special diet would meet the ends of
justice.
21. As noticed above, the petitioner being a senior
citizen would have required a considerable period of rest
and recuperation. During such period, she would have
- 13 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10731
MFA No. 202370 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030087862026
required the assistance of another person, who would have
attended to her by foregoing his or her regular work.
Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that a
sum of Rs.50,000/- towards attendant charges would be
just and reasonable.
22. For the foregoing reasons, the petitioner is
entitled to enhanced compensation as follows:
Sl. Heads Compensation
awarded by
the Tribunal
Compensation
awarded by this
Court
1. Towards medical Rs.2,25,540/- Rs.2,25,540/-
expenses
2. Pain and suffering and Rs.50,000/- Rs.80,000/-
loss of amenities in life
3. Loss of income during Rs.59,000/- Rs.75,000/-
laid up period
4. Towards transportation Rs.12,500/- Rs.15,000/-
charges
5. Towards special diet - Rs.20,000/-
6. Towards attendant - Rs.50,000/-
charges
Total Rs.3,47,040/- Rs.4,65,540/-
Difference amount Rs.1,18,500/-
- 14 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10731
MFA No. 202370 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030087862026
23. Hence, this Court proceeds to pass the
following:
ORDER
i. The appeal is allowed in part.
ii. The judgment and award passed by Tribunal in
MVC No.286/2023 is modified to the aforesaid
extent.
iii. The appellant/petitioner shall be entitled to
enhanced compensation of Rs.1,18,500/- with
interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the
date of claim petition till its realization.
iv. The respondent is directed to deposit the
enhanced compensation within six weeks from
the date of receipt of certified copy of this
judgment.
v. It is made clear that the appellant/petitioner is
not entitled to interest on the enhanced
- 15 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10731
MFA No. 202370 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030087862026
compensation for the delayed period of 75 days
that caused in filing the present appeal.
Sd/-
(BRUNGESH M)
JUDGE
SRT
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 34
CT: AK