Kumari Geetha M v. Iffco Tokio General Ins.Com. Ltd.,

((((((((((((HC-KAR, NC:(2026:KHC:43896( MFA(No.(7851(of(2024( ( ,,,,,,,,,, , CNR:(KAHC010680532024( ( ( IN(THE(HIGH(COURT(OF(KARNATAKA(AT(BENGALURU(

TH DATED(THIS(THE(17 (DAY(OF(AUGUST,(2026(

BEFORE(

THE(HON'BLE(MR.(JUSTICE(T.M.NADAF(

MISCELLANEOUS(FIRST(APPEAL(NO.7851(OF(2024(MV-I)(

BETWEEN:((

( KUMARI,GEETHA,M.,, D/O,MADHAVAN,@,MADAN,,,

NO.,27,SANJAY,GANDHINAGAR,,, KGF,,BEHIND,LIC,OFFICE,,, BANGARPET,,ROBERTSONPET,,,

KOLAR,DISTRICT-,563,122.,, , PRESENT,ADDRESS,, TH NO.36,,4 ,CROSS,,LAZAR,ROAD,, FARAZER,TOWN,,BENGALRUU, , APPELLANT,BEING,MINOR,, REP,BY,HER,MOTHER,, Digitally NATURAL,GUARDIAN,,,signedtiby REKHA0R SMT.,MAGESHWARI,, Location: W/O,MADHAVAN., High0Court …APPELLANT,of0Karnataka (BY,SRI.,GIRIMALLAIAH.,,ADVOCATE), , AND:( (

1., IFFCO,TOKIO,GENERAL,, INS.COM.,LTD.,, THNO.141,,SHANTI,TOWERS,,5 ,FLOOR,, KASTURINAGAR,,, EAST,OF,NGEF,LAYOUT,, BENGALURU,-,560,043., BY,ITS,MANAGER, ((((((((((((HC-KAR, NC:(2026:KHC:43896( MFA(No.(7851(of(2024( ( ,,,,,,,,,, , CNR:(KAHC010680532024( ( ( ,

2., DEEPAK,ANNAMALAI,P.,, S/O,PUNNIYA,MURTHY,,MAJOR,, (AGE,OF,R2,IS,NOT,KNOWN,TO,APPELLANT), NO.51,MEENAM,FLATS,,,, JYOTHINAGAR,,, SUBASH,NAGAR,EXTENSION,,, KOLATHUR,,CHENNAI,,, TAMIL,NADU,-,600,009., …RESPONDENTS, (BY,SRI.,B.,PRADEEP.,,ADVOCATE,FOR,R1,, ,,,,,,VIDE,ORDER,DATED,10.04.2026,,NOTICE,TO,R2,IS,,, ,,,,,,DISPENSED,WITH), , , THIS,MFA,IS,FILED,UNDER,SECTION,173(1),OF,MV,ACT,, 1988,, AGAINST, THE, JUDGMENT, AND, AWARD, DATED:01.10.2024,,PASSED,IN,MVC,NO.5786/2022,,ON,THE, FILE, OF, , THE, XXII, ADDITIONAL, SCJ, AND, ACJM,, MEMBER,, MACT,, BENGALURU, SCCH-24,, PARTLY, ALLOWING, THE, CLAIM, PETITION,FOR,COMPENSATION,AND,SEEKING,ENHANCEMENT, OF,COMPENSATION., , THIS,APPEAL,,COMING,ON,FOR,ADMISSION,,THIS,DAY,, JUDGMENT,WAS,DELIVERED,THEREIN,AS,UNDER:, CORAM:, HON'BLE,MR.,JUSTICE,T.M.NADAF, ,

ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal by the claimant seeking for enhancement of compensation arising out of judgment and award dated

01.10.2024 in MVC.No.5786/2022 passed by the XXII Additional SCJ and ACJM, Member MACT, Bengaluru SCCH-24, in respect of injuries suffered and disability resulted to a minor girl, aged 12 years, in the accident occurred on 05.07.20221.

¶2The Parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Tribunal.

¶3Heard, Sri.Girimallaiah, learned counsel appearing for the claimant and Sri. B.Pradeep, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1-Insurer. Vide order dated 10.04.2026, notice to respondent No.2 is dispensed with.

¶4Sri.Girimallaiah, relying on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in HITESH NAGJIBHAI PATEL

1 'Tribunal' for short

VS. BABABHAI NAGJIBHAI RABARI AND ANOTHER2, and sought to enhance the compensation. In the Judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court at paragraph No.9 of the judgment has stated that the monthly income of a minor, must be considered on the notional income of a person fixed in minimum wages. Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has considered to award Rs.3,00,000/- towards 'loss of marriage prospectus' and 'pain and suffering' at Rs.5,00,000/- and 'loss of amenities' at Rs.2,00,000/- and enhanced the compensation. Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has further enhanced the compensation of Rs.8,65,000/- awarded by the High Court to Rs.35,90,489/-.

¶5Per contra, Sri.B.Pradeep, refuting submissions of Sri.Girimallaiah submits that, the case involved in the case of HITESH supra involved is amputation of a limb of a minor. In that view of the

2 2025 SCC Online SC 3446

matter, the Hon'ble Supreme Court, after considering the entire evidence placed on record awarded such compensation. In the case on hand, it is the case of fracture, no doubt the fracture has resulted 70% to the particular limb and 23% to the whole body as stated by the doctor.

¶6Learned counsel further submits that, the Tribunal after relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of MALLIKARJUN VS DIVISIONAL MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED AND ANOTHER3 awarded compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- towards pain and suffering, future mental and physical shock, hardship, inconvenience on account of permanent disability and in all awarded Rs.5,60,500/- and sought to dismiss the appeal.

3 (2014) 14 SCC 396

¶7Having considered the rival submissions, this Court has perused the entire appeal papers as well as trial Court record.

¶8In paragraph Nos.9 and 13, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of HITESH stated supra, laid down the law that, even in the case of minor, the disability resulting in loss of future earning may be considered applying the notional income of a person under minimum wages. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is duty bound to consider adequate compensation, within four of concept of just compensation.

¶9Having considered the peculiar facts and circumstances involved in this case, wherein the multiple fractures resulted in confining the minor for 68 days in hospital on various occasions, subjecting her to various surgeries and the doctor's evidence stating 70% to the particular limb and 23.3% to the whole body. This Court is

of the opinion that, if the income fixed under the chart for the year 2022 at Rs.15,500/- per month as notional income is considered, while assessing the compensation towards loss of future income taking the disability at 23% with 40% towards future prospectus and multiplier at 15, considering the age below 15 years, as per SARLA VERMA AND OTHERS VS. DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION AND ANOTHER4, would meet the ends of justice.

¶10Having considered the fractures resulting in such a disability, definitely will take away the future good marital prospectus of minor girl and affect her life. In that view of the matter, this Court is of the opinion that the compensation awarded by Tribunal requires reconsideration and reassessment.

4 2009 ACJ 1298

¶11Accordingly, this Court proceed to reassess the compensation under all heads except medical expenses, as under: Sl. No. Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal In Rs. By this Court In Rs.

¶1Towards pain and sufferings already under one and to be suffered in future, mental and physical shock, hardship inconvenience on account of permanent disability 3,00,000-00 2,00,000-00

¶2Medical expenses 68,500-00 68,500-00

¶3Discomfort, inconvenience, and loss of earnings to the parents during the period of hospitalization 1,62,000-00 -

¶4Incidental Expenses 30,000-00 -

¶5Loss of amenities - 2,50,000-00

¶6Loss of income during laid up period, Since parents attended the child for 6 months on various occasions - 93,000-00 (15,500x6)

¶7Food, Nourishment and conveyance charges - 80,000-00

¶8Loss of marriage prospectus - 3,00,000-00

¶9Loss of future earnings - 8,98,380-00 (15,500+40%x12x15x23%)

TOTAL 5,60,500-00 18,89,880-00

¶12Accordingly, claimant is entitled for enhanced compensation of Rs.13,29,380/- (18,89,880 - 5,60,500) rounded off at Rs.13,30,000/-, which shall

carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization.

¶13For the foregoing reasons, this Court proceed to pass the following: ORDER i. Appeal is allowed in part. ii. The judgment and award dated 01.10.2024 in MVC.No.5786/2022 passed by XXII Additional SCJ and ACJM, Member MACT, Bengaluru, SCCH-24, is modified and the compensation is enhanced. iii. The claimant is entitled for enhanced compensation of Rs.13,30,000/-, which shall carry interest @ of 6% per annum from the rate of petition till realization. iv. The entire enhanced compensation along with accrued interest stated supra shall be deposited by the respondent No.1-Insurer within 6 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order before the concerned Tribunal.

v. Upon deposit, a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- shall be released in favour of the guardian of the minor to meet the incidental expenses and balance compensation shall be deposited in any interest bearing FDR with any Nationalized Bank till the claimant attains the age of majority and thereafter for another 05 years. vi. The Bank shall not permit any loan on the said amount without there being an order by the Tribunal/Court. vii. Trial Court records received, be sent forthwith to the Tribunal for further action without causing any further delay. viii. No order as to costs.

Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE

PK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26 ct-vn