Multiple Fractures Affected Farmer’s Work: Karnataka HC Raises Compensation To Rs 16.36 Lakh, Assesses 25% Disability

The claimant, an agriculturist, sustained multiple fractures and other injuries in a road accident involving a truck insured by Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Co. Ltd.

The Tribunal assessed his disability at 9% and awarded ₹7,79,408 in compensation.

The insurer appealed seeking reduction; the claimant appealed seeking enhancement, contending that the Tribunal had not adequately considered his injuries, the medical evidence, or his income

The High Court assessed disability at 25%, fixed monthly income at ₹15,500, and recalculated compensation

Under Sections 166 and 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, a claim for compensation may be brought before the Tribunal and an award may be challenged in appeal

Raj Kumar v. Ajay Kumar (2011) 1 SCC 343 supports consideration of a disability assessment where the doctor who issued the certificate gives evidence; the relevant inquiry includes the effect of disability on the claimant’s earning capacity

The Court relied on Pappu Deo Yadav v. Naresh Kumar (2020) 7 SCR 968 in assessing disability and compensation

It distinguished Anoop Maheshwari v. Shiv Kumar Singh, AIR 2025 SC 4099, on its facts

The Court also applied the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority’s notional income chart for an accident occurring in 2023 and relied on Puttama v. K.L. Narayana Reddy (2013) 15 SCC 45 and United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Sri Malyadri M, MFA No. 3895/2018, in fixing interest at 9% per annum

The Court found that the claimant’s multiple fractures—including fractures to the right femur, both bones of the right leg, the right clavicle, and the base of the fifth metacarpal—had to be assessed in light of his work as an agriculturist, which requires mobility, strength, and manual dexterity

It accepted the doctor’s evidence concerning the claimant’s disability and concluded that the injuries materially impaired his earning capacity; it therefore assessed disability at 25%, rather than 9%

The Court distinguished Anoop Maheshwari because the claimant there was a businessman fitted with a prosthetic leg, whereas this claimant’s occupation and injuries presented different functional consequences

Applying the 2023 notional income of ₹15,500 per month, adding 40% future prospects, and applying a multiplier of 17, the Court recalculated loss of future earnings and increased compensation under other heads, including pain and suffering and loss of amenities

It fixed interest at 9% per annum

It modified the Tribunal’s award and granted total compensation of ₹16,36,503, with interest at 9% per annum from the date of the petition until realization.

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