Karnataka High CourtCivil LawTransport, Maritime, and Aviation Law

Future-loss compensation must use the prescribed accident-year notional income and the established disability percentage.

R YESUPRABHUv.NAGARAJA M

Future-loss compensation must use the prescribed accident-year notional income and the established disability percentage.. R YESUPRABHU vs NAGARAJA M. Karnataka High Court. LawLens
The LawLens card for this judgmentXLinkedInWhatsApp

In brief

The question

Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal required enhancement in light of the claimant’s injuries and assessed disability.

The court held

The Court partly allowed the appeal and enhanced total compensation from ₹4,78,310 to ₹6,19,710.

It also directed

The claimant was awarded an additional ₹1,41,400 with interest at 6% per annum from the date of the petition until realization. The insurer was directed to deposit the enhanced amount with interest before the Tribunal within six weeks, and the claimant was permitted to withdraw the entire enhanced amount.

01Facts

The claimant sought compensation for injuries sustained in a road accident on 18 June 2025, allegedly caused by the rash and negligent driving of a car.

p. 3 · ¶ 3

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded ₹4,78,310 with interest at 6% per annum, including compensation for pain and suffering, disability, medical expenses, incidental charges, loss of amenities, and loss of income during treatment.

pp. 3–4 · ¶ 3–4

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

p. 2

02Issues

i.Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal required enhancement in light of the claimant’s injuries and assessed disability.

pp. 3–6 · ¶ 3–8

ii.Whether the Tribunal’s assessment of income and compensation for loss of future earnings and the laid-up period required revision.

pp. 4–6 · ¶ 6–8

03Law Applied

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

p. 2

In assessing compensation for loss of future earning capacity, the Court applied the annual-income × multiplier × disability-percentage method, using the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority’s notional monthly income of ₹18,000 for accidents in 2025 and a multiplier of 17 for the claimant’s age as treated by the Tribunal.

p. 4 · ¶ 6

No precedent was cited.

Provisions in the judgment · 1 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 173

04Reasoning

The Court retained the Tribunal’s assessment of 10% whole-body disability, based on the doctor’s assessment of 30% disability to the lower limb, and its application of multiplier 17. It substituted the 2025 notional monthly income of ₹18,000 for ₹17,000, resulting in future-earnings compensation of ₹3,67,200.

p. 4 · ¶ 6

In view of the claimant’s fractures of the right distal radius and ulna, it increased compensation for pain and suffering to ₹80,000 and loss of amenities to ₹60,000. It also allowed ₹36,000 for two months’ loss of income during recovery, while leaving medical expenses and incidental charges unchanged.

pp. 5–6 · ¶ 7–8

05Holding

The Court partly allowed the appeal and enhanced total compensation from ₹4,78,310 to ₹6,19,710.

pp. 6–7 · ¶ 8–9

The claimant was awarded an additional ₹1,41,400 with interest at 6% per annum from the date of the petition until realization. The insurer was directed to deposit the enhanced amount with interest before the Tribunal within six weeks, and the claimant was permitted to withdraw the entire enhanced amount.

pp. 6–7 · ¶ 8–9
Karnataka High Court

Original Court PDF

R YESUPRABHUvsNAGARAJA M

Karnataka High Court · October 13, 2026

Click to open original judgment

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

Click to open original judgment