Karnataka High Court
Transport, Maritime, and Aviation LawCivil Law

Functional disability for future income loss must account for the claimant’s occupation.

SRI GANESH MOGAVEERA vs SRI NARAYANA SHETTY

Karnataka High CourtJUDGMENT: October 08, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
Functional disability for future income loss must account for the claimant’s occupation.. SRI GANESH MOGAVEERA vs SRI NARAYANA SHETTY. Karnataka High Court. LawLens
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The claimant sought compensation for injuries sustained in a road accident on 14 June 2022, allegedly caused by the rash and negligent driving of a lorry.

Source reference: pp. 2–3

The Tribunal awarded global compensation of ₹1,00,000 with interest at 6% per annum.

Source reference: pp. 2–3

The claimant appealed under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking enhancement.

Source reference: pp. 2–3

The High Court considered the claimant’s age as 28 at the time of the accident, his tibial fracture, seven-day hospital admission, medical expenses, and assessed disability.

Source reference: pp. 3–5
02

Issues

Whether the Tribunal’s award of ₹1,00,000 required enhancement in light of the claimant’s injuries, disability, and resulting losses

Source reference: pp. 3–5

Whether the claimant was entitled to interest on the enhanced compensation for the period of delay in filing the appeal

Source reference: p. 6
03

Law Applied

The appeal was brought under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which provides for an appeal against an award of the Claims Tribunal.

Source reference: p. 2

In assessing compensation, the Court applied the multiplier method to calculate loss of future income, used the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority’s notional income of ₹15,500 per month for 2022, and assessed functional disability by reference to the claimant’s occupation and medical evidence.

Source reference: p. 4

The Court identified no precedent as the basis for its assessment.

Source reference: pp. 3–6
04

Reasoning

The Court found that the claimant, a mason, had sustained a right lateral tibial condyle chip fracture and that the doctor had assessed 28% disability to the right lower limb.

Source reference: pp. 4–5

Considering the claimant’s occupation, the Court treated functional disability as one-third of the assessed disability, or 9%, and calculated future income loss using the ₹15,500 monthly notional income and multiplier 17, resulting in ₹2,84,580.

Source reference: pp. 4–5

It additionally assessed pain and suffering, loss of amenities, three months’ lost income, medical expenses, and attendant, conveyance, food, and nourishment charges, bringing total compensation to ₹4,55,391.

Source reference: p. 5

The Court denied interest for the 263-day delay in filing the appeal, consistent with its earlier order.

Source reference: p. 6
05

Holding

The appeal was allowed in part.

The claimant was awarded enhanced compensation of ₹3,55,391 over the Tribunal’s award, with interest at 6% per annum from the date of the petition until realization, except for the 263-day appeal-delay period.

Source reference: pp. 6–7

The insurer was directed to deposit the enhanced compensation and interest within six weeks, and the claimant was permitted to receive the entire enhanced amount.

Source reference: pp. 6–7
06

Acts & Sections Cited

1 provisions across 1 statute referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.

Motor Vehicles Act, 19881

Karnataka High Court

Original Court PDF

SRI GANESH MOGAVEERAvsSRI NARAYANA SHETTY

Karnataka High Court · October 08, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment