Karnataka High Court
Civil LawInsurance Law

Injured non-earning students may receive disability damages based on notional income and assessed disability.

HARSHA SARPANGALA vs MRS. SHEELA S. BALLA

Karnataka High CourtJUDGMENT: October 01, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
Injured non-earning students may receive disability damages based on notional income and assessed disability.. HARSHA SARPANGALA vs MRS. SHEELA S. BALLA. Karnataka High Court. LawLens
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The appellant, a second-year MBBS student, sustained multiple injuries in a road accident on 29 December 2014 and was hospitalised from 29 December 2014 to 31 January 2015, with a further admission in November 2016.

Source reference: p. 3

The Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs. 5,42,300, including Rs. 3,00,000 for loss of amenities, but did not award compensation for disability or loss of earning capacity.

Source reference: pp. 3–4

The claimant appealed under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking enhancement; the accident and insurance coverage were not disputed.

Source reference: pp. 2–3
02

Issues

Whether the appellant was entitled to compensation for disability or loss of future earning capacity, notwithstanding that he was a student and had no established actual earnings.

Source reference: pp. 6–7

If so, what amount of additional compensation was just and proper.

Source reference: pp. 6–9
03

Law Applied

In assessing compensation for a non-earning claimant who has sustained bodily injuries, the court may award damages for disability by applying a suitable notional income and multiplier, even where the claimant has no actual earnings to lose.

Source reference: p. 8

The court treated the relevant loss as compensation for disability, rather than proved loss of earnings, and applied a multiplier of 18 to the appellant’s notional annual income.

Source reference: p. 8

The appeal was brought under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

Source reference: p. 2

The judgment does not identify a specific statutory provision or particular precedent as the basis for the disability assessment.

Source reference: no citation
04

Reasoning

Although the medical evidence did not specify whole-body disability and the appellant’s educational records were not produced, the court considered the evidence of the doctors and concluded that the injuries had caused disability or discomfort.

Source reference: p. 7

It found no basis to conclude that the injuries had affected the appellant’s studies or future professional life, but held that this did not exclude compensation for disability.

Source reference: p. 7

Given the appellant’s age and status as a medical student, the court fixed notional income at Rs. 8,500 per month, assessed whole-body disability at 10%, and applied multiplier 18, resulting in Rs. 1,83,600 for disability.

Source reference: p. 8

It also enhanced compensation for pain and suffering by Rs. 20,000 and increased the combined allowance for attendant charges, food and nourishment by Rs. 5,400.

Source reference: pp. 8–9
05

Holding

The appeal was allowed in part.

The Tribunal’s award was modified by granting an additional Rs. 2,09,000, with interest at 6% per annum from the date of the claim petition until realisation.

Source reference: p. 9

The judgment’s table states a total of Rs. 7,51,265, although the order describes the enhancement as being over the Tribunal’s award of Rs. 5,42,300.

Source reference: pp. 4, 9
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

HARSHA SARPANGALAvsMRS. SHEELA S. BALLA

Karnataka High Court · October 01, 2026

Click to open original judgment

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

Click to open original judgment