Karnataka High Court
Chaya W/O Vinayak Koshti vs Naveen S/O Balachandra And Anr on 27 October, 2025
Author: H.T.Narendra Prasad
Bench: H.T.Narendra Prasad
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6307-DB
MFA No. 200365 of 2020
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TYAGARAJA N. INAVALLY
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO. 200365 OF 2020 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
CHAYA W/O VINAYAK KOSHTI,
AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. SHAKTI NAGAR,
VIJAYAPURA-586 101.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. BAPUGOUDA SIDDAPPA, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed AND:
by RAMESH
MATHAPATI
Location: HIGH 1. NAVEEN S/O BALACHANDRA KOKKALAKI,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA AGE: MAJOR, OCC: OWNER OF THE VEHICLE,
R/O. KOKKALAKI GALLI,
RABKAVI TQ. JAMAKHANDI,
DIST. BAGALKOT-587 101.
2. THE BRANCH MANAGER,
THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
SS FRONT ROAD, VIJAYAPURA-586 101.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SUDARSHAN M, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
(R1 IS SERVED)
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6307-DB
MFA No. 200365 of 2020
HC-KAR
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 173(1) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988,
PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS, TO MODIFY THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 05.10.2018 PASSED IN MVC.
NO.889/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE Court OF THE I
ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MOTOR ACCIDENT
CLAIMS TRIBUNAL NO.VI, VIJAYAPURA AT VIJAYAPURA. AND
ALLOW THIS APPEAL TO GRANT THE COMPENSATION AMOUNT
BY Rs.32,09,250/- ONLY AS CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT
BEFORE THIS HON'BLE COURT.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS
DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD
AND
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TYAGARAJA N. INAVALLY
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD)
1. This appeal under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') has been filed by the claimant being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 05.10.2018 passed by I Addl. Senior Civil Judge and MACT-VI, Vijayapur in MVC No.889/2012.
2. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal briefly stated are that on 04.02.2012 when the claimant along with three other family members were traveling in -3- NC: 2025:KHC-K:6307-DB MFA No. 200365 of 2020 HC-KAR Mahindra Vertio Car bearing registration No.KA-48/3986 on NH-218 road from Vijayapur to Gulbarga side, at about 10.45 a.m., when the said vehicle was near Bhima Universal School on Sindagi road, the driver of the said Car drove it with a high speed and in a rash and negligent manner, he lost control over it has turtled and fell in a ditch nearby the road. As a result of the aforesaid accident, the claimant sustained grievous injuries and was hospitalized.
3. The claimant filed a petition under Section 166 of the Act seeking compensation. It was pleaded that she spent huge amount towards medical expenses, conveyance charges, etc. It was further pleaded that the accident occurred purely on account of the rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver.
4. On service of notice, the respondent Nos.1 and 2 appeared through counsel and filed written statement denying the averments made in the claim petition. -4-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6307-DB MFA No. 200365 of 2020 HC-KAR
5. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the Claims Tribunal framed the issues and thereafter recorded the evidence. The claimant was examined herself as PW-1 and Dr.Ravi Gopal Verma was examined as PW-2 and got exhibited documents namely Ex.P1 to Ex.P41. On behalf of the respondents, no witness was examined but got exhibited document namely Ex.CR1. The Claims Tribunal, by the impugned judgment, inter alia, held that the accident took place on account of rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver, as a result of which, the claimant sustained injuries. The Tribunal further held that the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs.10,40,750/- along with interest at the rate of 8% p.a. and directed the respondent-Insurance Company to deposit the compensation amount along with interest. Being aggrieved, the present appeal has been filed.
6. The learned counsel for the claimant has raised the following contentions:
-5-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6307-DB MFA No. 200365 of 2020 HC-KAR
(a) Firstly, that the claimant has suffered grievous injuries and she was examined by the Court Commissioner appointed by the Court Sri.Dr.Ravi Gopal Verma-PW.2, Neurosurgeon of Neurosciences in Aster CMI Hospital, Bangalore. In his evidence he has categorically stated that, due to the accidental injuries, the claimant has suffered disability of 100% for which she is suffering from paraplegia and the claimant is unable to walk and do her day-to-day work and she is unable to move without the support of an attender till her last breath. The Tribunal has erred in considering the disability only to an extent of 60% which is on the lower side. He further contended that in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Pappu Deo Yadav vs. Naresh Kumar and others, 2020 SCC OnLine SC 752, in cases of permanent disablement incurred as a result of a motor accident, the claimant can seek, apart from compensation for future loss of income, the claimant is entitled for compensation towards future prospects. -6-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6307-DB MFA No. 200365 of 2020 HC-KAR
(b) Lastly, the claimant has sustained grievous injuries. Even after discharge from the hospital, she was not in a position to discharge her regular work. She has suffered lot of pain during treatment. Considering the same, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the heads of 'loss of amenities', 'pain and sufferings' and future medical expenses are on the lower side. Hence, he sought for allowing the appeal.
7. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent-Insurance Company has raised following counter contentions;
(a) Firstly, he has contended that considering the injuries sustained by the claimant, evidence of doctor, disability certificate and medical records, the Tribunal has rightly assessed the disability at 60% to the whole body.
(b) Secondly, he contended that the claimant is aged about 23 years and there is possibility of recovery from the said injury. Hence, the compensation awarded by the -7- NC: 2025:KHC-K:6307-DB MFA No. 200365 of 2020 HC-KAR Tribunal under the heads of 'loss of amenities', 'pain and sufferings' and future medical expenses are just and reasonable and it does not call for interference.
(c) Lastly, in view of the Division Bench decision of this Court in the case of Ms.Joyeeta Bose and others -v- Venkateshan.V and others (MFA 5896/2018 and connected matters disposed of on 24.8.2020), the rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal at 8% p.a. on the compensation amount is on the higher side, the same is to be reduced to 6% per annum. Accordingly, he sought for dismissal of the appeal.
8. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the judgment and award of the Tribunal.
9. It is not in dispute that the claimant has sustained injuries in the road traffic accident that occurred on 04.02.2012 due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver. Due to the said accident, the claimant has suffered the following injuries: -8-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6307-DB MFA No. 200365 of 2020 HC-KAR
(a) structured wound 4x4 cm over right upper eye;
(b) blankness of right eye; (c) abrasion 4x4 cm over right cheek, (d) tenderness over both the joint, (e) abrasion 6x1/4th cm over right elbow 10. The Claims Tribunal has appointed the Court
Commissioner Sri.Dr.Ravi Gopal Verma, Neurosurgeon of Neurosciences in Aster CMI Hospital, Bangalore, as PW.2, wherein he has categorically stated in his evidence that the claimant is unable to move her lower limb, she is suffering from paraplegia, she is unable to walk and do her day-to-day work and she is using the wheel chair for her movement and he opined that the claimant has suffered 100% disability. The relevant portion of the evidence of doctor is extracted herein below;
"(i) On examination PR-98/min, BP-150/86 mm/hg, Glasgow Coma Scale E4V5M6, spastic paraplegia, Pupils bilateral equal and reactive to -9- NC: 2025:KHC-K:6307-DB MFA No. 200365 of 2020 HC-KAR light, chest and pelvic compression - Negative, Cardio Vascular System/Respiratory rate/per Abdomen: No abnormality detected.
(ii) I state that MRI Cervical spine showed Myelomalacic changes at C6-C7. She was admitted in Ramaiah Hospital for Neuro rehabilitation.
(iii) I state that she was managed conservatively with vigorous physiotherapy and medications.
(iv) I state that she was discharged on 08.05.2013 with required physiotherapy and medications.
(v) I state that, she was seen by me on 21.05.2018 at Aster CMI Hospital, and for all the above mentioned disabilities I would give a disability of 100% according to the guidelines of the DGHS, WHO and AIIMS expert group recommendations."
11. Considering the evidence of the doctor, medical records, age of the claimant, we are of the opinion that the whole body disability has to be assessed at 100%.
- 10 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6307-DB MFA No. 200365 of 2020 HC-KAR
12. The Tribunal, in the absence of proof of income has assessed monthly income of the claimant at Rs.5,000/- p.m., which is just and proper and no interference is called by this Court. In view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Pappu Deo (supra), 40% of the income has to be added towards loss of future prospects. The age of the claimant is 21 years. The multiplier applicable to the age group of the claimant is '18'. On re- determination and re-assessment, the claimant is entitled to a sum of Rs.15,12,000/- (Rs.7,000*12*18*100%) under the head 'loss of future income'.
13. Due to the accident, the claimant has suffered grievous injuries and disability at 100%. She has suffered lot of pain during treatment and she has to suffer unhappiness with the disability stated by the doctor throughout her life. Considering the same, we are inclined to enhance the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the head of 'pain and sufferings' from Rs.50,000/-
- 11 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6307-DB MFA No. 200365 of 2020 HC-KAR to Rs.1,50,000/- and under the head of 'loss of amenities' from Rs.30,000/- to Rs.1,50,000/-.
14. Further, due to the accidental injury, the claimant has suffered 100% disability and she is unable to move from the bed and therefore she requires one attender for her support till her last breath. Considering the evidence of doctor and injury suffered by the claimant, it would meet the ends of justice if a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- is awarded towards 'future medical expenses and future attendant charges' which shall not carry any interest.
15. Considering the nature of injuries, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under other heads is just and reasonable.
16. Thus, the claimant is entitled to the following compensation:
- 12 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6307-DB
MFA No. 200365 of 2020
HC-KAR
As awarded As awarded
by the by this
Compensation under
Tribunal Court
different Heads
(Rs.) (Rs.)
Pain and sufferings 50,000 1,50,000
Medical expenses 1,92,750 1,92,750
Loss of earning during 30,000 30,000
laid up period
Loss of future earning 6,48,000 15,12,000
capacity on account of
permanent disability
Loss of amenities and 30,000 1,50,000
future unhappiness
Attendant, diet, 40,000 40,000
conveyance and other
charges
Future medical expenses 50,000 1,50,000
and future attendant
charges
Total 10,40,750 22,24,750
17. In the result, the following order is passed:
ORDER
a) The appeal is allowed in part.
b) The judgment of the Claims Tribunal is modified.
- 13 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6307-DB MFA No. 200365 of 2020 HC-KAR
c) The claimant is entitled to a total compensation of Rs.22,24,750/-.
d) The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the compensation amount along with interest from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of realization, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment excluding interest for the compensation awarded under the head of 'future medical expenses and future attendant charges'.
e) In view of judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of 'MS.JOYEETA BOSE' (supra), the enhanced compensation shall carry interest at 6% per annum. The Insurance Company is directed to pay 6% per annum on the enhanced compensation.
f) The apportionment, deposit and release of amount shall be made in terms of the award of the Tribunal.
- 14 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6307-DB MFA No. 200365 of 2020 HC-KAR
g) The enhanced compensation amount shall be released in favour of the claimant after due identification.
h) In view of the order dated 04.08.2021 passed by this Court, the claimant is not entitled for interest on the enhanced compensation for the delayed period of 392 days in filing the appeal.
Sd/-
(H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE Sd/-
(TYAGARAJA N. INAVALLY) JUDGE MSR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 64 CT: SB