M. Venkatesh v. K. Venkatashama Chari

NC:(2026:KHC:3676( MFA(No.(2317(of(2017( ( , ,,HC-KAR( ( ( IN(THE(HIGH(COURT(OF(KARNATAKA(AT(BENGALURU(

NDDATED(THIS(THE(22 (DAY(OF(JANUARY,(2026(

BEFORE( THE(HON'BLE(MR.(JUSTICE(C(M(JOSHI( MISCELLANEOUS(FIRST(APPEAL(NO.(2317(OF(2017((MV-I)(

BETWEEN:((

(

M.,VENKATESH,,, S/O.,MUNIYAPPA,, AGED,ABOUT,47,YEARS,,

R/O.,DODDAVALLABBI,VILLAGE,&,POST,, NARASAPUR,HOBLI,, KOLAR,TALUK,&,DISTRICT.,

…APPELLANT, (BY,SMT.,PAYAL,DECHAMMA,,ADVOCATE,FOR,, ,,,,,,SR.,PAVANA,CHANDRA,SHETTY,,ADVOCATE),

, AND:( (

1., K.,VENKATASHAMA,CHARI,,, S/O.,LATE,KRISHNA,CHARI,, R/O.,HALERI,VILLAGE,, MATNAHALLI,POST,, Digitallytisigned KOLAR,TALUK,AND,DISTRICT-563,101., by0NANDINI0R Location:0HIGH

2., RELIANCE,GENERAL,INSURANCE,COMPANY,LTD.,, COURT0OF TH NO.28,,EAST,WING,,5 ,FLOOR,,,KARNATAKA CENTENARY,BUILDING,,M.G.,ROAD,, BENGALURU-560,001., REP.,BY,ITS,BRANCH,MANAGER., …RESPONDENTS, (BY,SRI,D,VIJAYA,KUMAR,,ADVOCATE,FOR,R-2;, ,,,,,,,NOTICE,TO,R-1,IS,DISPENSED,WITH,V/O,DATED,, ,,,,,,,21.11.2017), , , THIS,MFA,IS,FILED,U/S,173(1),OF,MV,ACT,AGAINST,THE, JUDGMENT, AND, AWARD, DATED, 16.01.2017, PASSED, IN, MVC, NO.111/2015, ON, THE, FILE, OF, THE, I, ADDITIONAL, SENIOR,

CIVIL JUDGE, & ACJM, KOLAR, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI

ORAL JUDGMENT

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent No.2.

¶2Being aggrieved by the quantum of the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal in MVC.No.111/2015, the petitioner therein is before this Court seeking enhancement of the compensation.

¶3The fact that there was an accident on

11.03.2015 involving the vehicle bearing No.KA-07-M-6086 owned by the respondent No.1 and insured by respondent No.2 is not in dispute.

¶4Learned counsel appearing for the appellant would submit that the Tribunal erred in considering the notional income of the petitioner. It is submitted that he

was an agriculturist, engaged in milk vending, aged about 45 years and though he had stated that he was earning Rs.20,000/- per month, the Tribunal has assessed the income only at Rs.7,000/- per month. It is submitted that the notional income should have been appropriately considered by the Tribunal. It is further stated that the compensation amount under the head of 'loss of amenities in life' and the 'incidental expenses including conveyance' are also on the lower side and therefore, a reassessment be made by this Court.

¶5Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 submits that the quantum of the compensation amount determined by the Tribunal is proper and correct and there is no need for any enhancement.

¶6A perusal of the records would reveal that the Tribunal has assessed the compensation under all heads but while assessing the 'future loss of income', it has assessed the notional income at Rs.7,000/-. The guidelines issued by the KSLSA for the purpose of settlement of the

disputes before the Lok-Adalat prescribed a notional income of Rs.9,000/- for the year 2015. In umpteen number of judgments, it has been held by this Court that the guidelines issued by the KSLSA are in general conformity with the wages fixed under the Minimum Wages Act and therefore, it is acceptable. The disability of the petitioner assessed by the Tribunal at 12.3% also do not require any reconsideration. Therefore, 'loss of future income' is calculated as Rs.9,000/- X 12 X 14 X 12.3% = Rs.1,85,976/- by adopting a multiplier of '14' for the age of 45 years.

¶7As a consequence, the 'loss of income during the laid up period' is calculated for 03 months as Rs.9,000/- x 3 = Rs.27,000/-.

¶8The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.5,000/- under the head of 'loss of amenities in life' and the petitioner having suffered the fracture of tibia and fibula, would have to bear the same for rest of the life. Therefore,

the compensation under the head of 'loss of amenities in life' is enhanced to Rs.30,000/-.

¶9The compensation awarded under the remaining heads i.e., pain and sufferings, medical expenses, conveyance expenses and incidental charges do not require any reconsideration.

¶10Thus, the petitioner is entitled for the modified compensation under different heads as below:

¶11Thus, the petitioner is entitled for enhanced compensation of Rs.70,028/- with interest and therefore, PARTICULARS AMOUNT (IN RS.) Future loss of income due to disability 1,85,976/- Pain and sufferings 55,000/- Medical expenses 79,950/- Incidental charges 7,000/- Loss of income during hospitalization 27,000/- Loss of amenities and expectations 30,000/- Conveyance 2,000/- 3,86,926/- 3,16,898/- TOTAL Less awarded by Tribunal

Enhancement 70,028/-

the appeal deserves to be allowed in part. Hence, the following: ORDER

(i) The appeal is allowed in part.

(ii) The impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is modified by awarding a sum of Rs.70,028/- in addition to what has been awarded by the Tribunal together with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its deposit.

(iii) The respondent No.2/Insurance company is directed to deposit the entire compensation amount within a period of six weeks from the date of this order.

(iv) Rest of the order of the Tribunal stands unaltered.

Sd/- (C M JOSHI) JUDGE

NR/- List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14