MFA/7034/2019 of SRI B R PAVAN KUMAR Vs THE MANAGER on 1 October 2026

ORAL JUDGMENT

ON I.A.No.1/2019:

1. I.A.No.1/2019 is filed seeking condonation of delay of 55 days in filing the appeal. 1.1 The learned counsel for the respondent No.1/ Insurance Company submits that he has ‘no objection’ for the delay being condoned. 1.2 For the reasons stated in the affidavit accompanying the application, I.A.No.1/2019 is allowed. The delay of 55 days in filing the appeal is condoned.

HC-KAR

ON MFA.No.7034/2019:

2. The present appeal seeks to challenge a Judgment and Order dated 25.03.2019 passed by the learned 4th Additional District and Sessions Judge, Hassan District (Sit at Channarayapatna) in MVC No.1732/2017 [hereinafter referred to as the “Impugned Award”]. By the Impugned Award, compensation in a sum of Rs.2,33,000/- along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum has been awarded to the appellant/claimant.

3. The challenge in the present appeal is by the appellant/claimant.

4. Though the appeal is posted for Orders, given the pendency of the matter and the year of accident, with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the same is taken up for final disposal.

5. The learned counsel for the parties submitted that they have amicably settled the issues in the matter.

HC-KAR

6. The learned counsel for the appellant/claimant submits that the compensation qua disability was not given in accordance with the calculations as set out in the judgments of the Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation And Another1 and National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi2. He submits that a lumpsum amount of compensation was awarded without examining the percentage of disability. Secondly, he contends that no compensation towards loss of income during laid up period was awarded. He also submits that the Tribunal ought to have taken into consideration the notional income of Rs.11,000/- per month, as per the Notional Income Chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, Bengaluru [KSLSA].

7. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.1/Insurance Company submits that since the disability 1 (2009) 6 SCC 121 2 (2017) 16 SCC 680

HC-KAR

as assessed by the Doctor[CW-1] was 4% and the accident took place in the year 2017, the disability would have to be calculated as per the notional income of Rs.11,000/- per month and not as has been calculated by the learned Tribunal.

8. This Court has also examined the record. The learned Tribunal had awarded the following compensation:

8.1 Concededly, the evidence of the Doctor showed that the Doctor had assessed the whole body disability at 4%, which is not disputed. It is further not disputed that the Sl. No. Particulars Amount (Rs.)

Towards pain and suffering 50,000/-

Towards Medical expenses 83,000/-

Towards disability, discomfort, disappointment, sorrow, inconvenience, disadvantage, joyless life 50,000/-

Towards attendant charges, food, diet, nourishment and transportation expenses and loss of income during laid off period, etc. 50,000/-

TOTAL 2,33,000/-

HC-KAR

injured was aged about 25 years at the time of accident and was hospitalised for a period of four days.

9. Accordingly and in view of the consensus arrived at between the parties, the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal is enhanced in the following manner:

10. Thus, the appellant/claimant is entitled to an enhanced compensation in a sum of Rs.58,040/- along with interest as awarded by the learned Tribunal, from the date of realisation.

Sl. No. Particulars Amount (Rs.)

Towards pain and suffering 50,000/-

Towards Medical expenses 83,000/-

Towards loss of future earnings [Rs.11,000/-x12x4%x18] 95,040/-

Towards loss of income during laid up period [11,000/-x3 months] 33,000/-

Towards attendant charges, food, diet, nourishment and transportation expenses 30,000/-

TOTAL 2,91,040/-

Less: Compensation awarded by Tribunal 2,33,000/-

Enhanced compensation 58,040/-

HC-KAR

10.1 This Court is not inclined to interfere with the rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal at 9% per annum.

11. Accordingly, this Court proceeds to pass the following:

ORDER

(i) The appeal is allowed in-part;

(ii) The impugned Judgment and Award dated 25.03.2019 passed by the learned 4th Additional District and Sessions Judge, Hassan District (Sit at Channarayapatna) in MVC No.1732/2017 is modified, enhancing the compensation by Rs.58,040/- along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum as awarded by the learned Tribunal.

(iii) The respondent No.1/Insurance Company is directed to pay the enhanced compensation with interest as awarded by the Tribunal within four weeks from today.

HC-KAR

(iv) The remaining portion of the Impugned Award of the Tribunal remains undisturbed.

(v) No order as to costs.

(vi) The Registry is directed to draw the modified Award accordingly.

(vii) The Registry is directed transmit a copy of this judgment to the concerned Tribunal.

Sd/- (TARA VITASTA GANJU) JUDGE

BMV* List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6

Digitally signed by TARA VITASTA GANJU Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA