Karnataka High CourtTransport, Maritime, and Aviation LawCivil Law

Karnataka HC Raises Road-Crash Claimant’s Compensation To Rs 2.85 Lakh, Assessing 8% Functional Disability After Humerus Fracture

SRI.MURIGEPPA S/O GADIGEPPA DODDAMANIv.THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER

Karnataka HC Raises Road-Crash Claimant’s Compensation To Rs 2.85 Lakh, Assessing 8% Functional Disability After Humerus Fracture. SRI.MURIGEPPA S/O GADIGEPPA DODDAMANI vs THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER. Karnataka High Court. LawLens
The LawLens card for this judgmentXLinkedInWhatsApp

In brief

The question

1. Whether the disability certificate and medical evidence justified awarding compensation for loss of future earning capacity, and, if so, what functional disability should be assessed

The court held

The appeal was partly allowed, and the Tribunal’s award was modified.

It also directed

The claimant was awarded total compensation of ₹2,84,916, with interest at 9% per annum from the date of the petition until realization.

NWKRTC was directed to deposit the compensation and accrued interest before the Tribunal within eight weeks of receiving a certified copy of the judgment.

01Facts

The claimant appealed under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking enhancement of compensation awarded under Section 166 in MVC No. 1399/2018.

pp. 2–5

The accident and NWKRTC’s liability were not disputed.

pp. 2–5

The Tribunal awarded ₹57,746, principally for medical expenses, pain and suffering, travel, nourishment, and inpatient expenses.

pp. 2–5

The claimant relied on a disability certificate stating 25% disability of the left upper limb and 15% to the whole body; the doctor who issued it testified as PW2.

pp. 2–5

02Issues

i.1. Whether the disability certificate and medical evidence justified awarding compensation for loss of future earning capacity, and, if so, what functional disability should be assessed

pp. 3–5

ii.2. Whether the Tribunal’s awards under the other heads, including interest, required enhancement

pp. 3, 5–6

03Law Applied

Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 provides the basis for a claim for compensation arising from a motor-vehicle accident, while Section 173(1) permits an appeal against the Tribunal’s award

p. 2, 1

Under Raj Kumar v. Ajay Kumar, 2011 (1) SCC 343, a medical assessment of physical disability must be considered in determining compensation, but the court must separately assess the claimant’s functional disability and its effect on earning capacity

p. 4

The Court also relied on Puttamma v. K.L. Narayana Reddy, (2013) 15 SCC 45, and United India Insurance Company Limited v. Sri Malyadri M, MFA No. 3895/2018, in fixing the rate of interest

p. 6

Provisions in the judgment · 2 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 173Section 166

04Reasoning

Although the Tribunal had declined to rely on the disability certificate because PW2 was not the treating doctor, the High Court accepted it because PW2 testified and corroborated its contents.

pp. 4–5

Applying Raj Kumar, the Court distinguished the certificate’s medical disability assessment from the claimant’s functional disability: having regard to the left humerus fracture, surgery, and physical demands of agricultural work, it assessed functional disability at 8%.

pp. 4–5

As the claimant had not proved his asserted occupation or income, the Court used the KSLSA chart to fix monthly income at ₹11,750 and applied the multiplier of 14 for his age of 42.

p. 4

It also enhanced certain non-pecuniary and incidental awards, allowed for future medical expenses for removal of the fixation hardware, and fixed interest at 9% per annum.

pp. 5–6

05Holding

The appeal was partly allowed, and the Tribunal’s award was modified.

p. 7

The claimant was awarded total compensation of ₹2,84,916, with interest at 9% per annum from the date of the petition until realization.

p. 7

NWKRTC was directed to deposit the compensation and accrued interest before the Tribunal within eight weeks of receiving a certified copy of the judgment.

p. 7
Karnataka High Court

Original Court PDF

SRI.MURIGEPPA S/O GADIGEPPA DODDAMANIvsTHE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER

Karnataka High Court · November 11, 2026

Click to open original judgment

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

Click to open original judgment