Karnataka High Court
Smt. Nagarathna Karvi vs M/S. Ve Commercial Vehicle Ltd on 16 June, 2025
Author: B M Shyam Prasad
Bench: B M Shyam Prasad
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:20607-DB
MFA No. 6799 of 2019
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 6799 OF 2019 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
SMT. NAGARATHNA KARVI
W/O. SUBRAMANYA KARVI,
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,
R/AT PADDU MANE,
JANATHA COLONY,
AMBAGILU UPPUNDA VILLAGE,
KUNDAPURA TALUK,
UDUPI-576 232.
Digitally
signed by ...APPELLANT
VANAMALA (BY SRI. GOVINDARAJ K JOIS.,ADVOCATE)
N
Location: AND:
High Court
of
Karnataka 1. M/S. VE COMMERCIAL VEHICLE LTD.,
10/2, INDUSTRIAL AREA NO.1,
PITAMPUR, DHAR DISTRICT,
MADHYA PRADESH-454 775,
REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:20607-DB
MFA No. 6799 of 2019
HC-KAR
2. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INS. CO. LTD.,
ICICI LOMBARD HOUSE,
414, VEER SAVARKER MARG,
NEAR SIDDI VINAYAK TEMPLE,
PRABHADEVI,
MUMBAI-400 025,
REP BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. SHREYA, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. S.RAMAKRISHNAN ., ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI. B. PRADEEP, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT,
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED
20.05.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.837/2017 ON THE FILE
OF THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE
UDUPI (SITTING AT KUNDAPURA), KUNDAPURA, PARTLY
ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION
AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING,
THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS
UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD
and
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:20607-DB
MFA No. 6799 of 2019
HC-KAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD) The appellant is the claimant in MVC No.837/2017 on the file of Additional District and Sessions Judge and Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Udupi, sitting at Kundapura [for short, 'the Tribunal']. The appellant's claim petition is considered along with two other claim petitions [MVC Nos.836/2017 and 838/2017], and these petitions are disposed of by the common impugned Judgment and Award dated 20.05.2019. The Tribunal has awarded the appellant a sum of Rs.4,62,000/- under the following heads:
Amount Sl.No. Particulars (in Rs.)
1. Injury, pain and sufferings 40,000
2. Medical Expenses 3,74,972
3. Loss of earning during 27,000 treatment
4. Conveyance, nourishment and 20,000 attendant charges Total 4,61,972 Rounded off 4,62,000 -4- NC: 2025:KHC:20607-DB MFA No. 6799 of 2019 HC-KAR
2. This Court must record that the second respondent [the Insurer] does not dispute its liability, and the appellant's claim for compensation is in the following circumstances. The appellant and her husband, along with another, were traveling on a two-wheeler when a goods vehicle dashed against the motorcycle resulting in injuries to the appellant and the other claimants. The accident is with the goods vehicle hitting the two-wheeler from behind. The fact of accident, the reason for accident and the second respondent's liability as an Insurer to pay just and reasonable compensation as is contemplated under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 are not in contest. The appellant only seeks enhancement in the compensation.
3. The learned counsels for the parties are heard for disposal of the appeal. Sri Govindraj K Jois, the learned counsel for the appellant, submits that this Court must enhance compensation under the -5- NC: 2025:KHC:20607-DB MFA No. 6799 of 2019 HC-KAR heads of [a] pain and suffering, [b] costs of conveyance, nourishment and attendant charges, and [c] loss of amenities and loss of income for the period between 13.01.2017 and 29.03.2018. The learned counsel also argues that this Court must grant compensation towards loss of future income because the appellant who suffered, apart from other injuries, transverse process fracture in the pubic area and in the rib cage, has suffered disability resulting in loss of future income. The learned counsel submits that the Tribunal has accepted the appellant's case that she is a fisher woman holding that she was earning Rs.9,000/- but the assessment of the monthly income at Rs.9,000/- is not just compensation and her income should have been taken at Rs.15,000/- per month.
4. Mr. B Pradeep, the learned counsel for the Insurer, who is supported by Ms. Shreya, the learned counsel for the first respondent, submits that there -6- NC: 2025:KHC:20607-DB MFA No. 6799 of 2019 HC-KAR cannot be any award towards loss of future income in the light of the evidence that is referred to by the Tribunal, and in this regard, the learned counsel invites this Court's attention to the Doctor's evidence [the evidence of PW.4] who has stated that he has issued no Disability Certificate and that the appellant has suffered no disability or that she has suffered any physical harm that would affect her conjugal rights.
5. This Court finds considerable merit in this submission because nothing is brought on record about the appellant having undergone surgery or a disability, which could be considered despite the afore evidence on record. However, it is brought out without dispute that the appellant was hospitalized intermittently for sixty days with KMC Hospital, Manipal. She was first hospitalized on 13.01.2017, and with the discharge and readmission, she is ultimately discharged on 23.03.2018. These -7- NC: 2025:KHC:20607-DB MFA No. 6799 of 2019 HC-KAR circumstances must be considered as must be the fact that the appellant has suffered fracture in the ribs and also Transverse Process Fracture which has required sustained hospitalization. Further, this Court must also record that it is sufficiently brought on record that the appellant hails from the fishing community and was earning as a fisherwoman. The Tribunal has taken the income of the appellant at Rs.9,000/- based on the Notification issued in the year 2010 as per Section 4 of the Employees' Compensation Act, 1923.
6. Mr. B Pradeep and Ms. Shreya cannot dispute that even for settlement in claims arising out of accidents in the year 2017, the notional income, when there is no proof of factual income, is taken at Rs.11,000/- per month. If the appellant was working as a fisherwoman, and even otherwise, if she were to be taken to be only a homemaker, her income cannot be taken at a sum less than Rs.11,000/- per month. -8-
NC: 2025:KHC:20607-DB MFA No. 6799 of 2019 HC-KAR These circumstances are examined to consider whether there must be any enhancement in payments in the compensation towards [a] pain and suffering, [b] costs of conveyance, nourishment and attendant charges, [c] loss of amenities and loss of income for the period between 13.01.2017 and 29.03.20181, and [d] towards loss of future income.
7. This Court is of the view that when there is a fracture in the abdomen area and the fracture of ribs and with the appellant undergoing repeated admissions for six months, the compensation of Rs.40,000/- towards pain and suffering and Rs.20,000/- towards conveyance, nourishment and attendant charges would not be just compensation and that the compensation under these heads must be Rs.50,000/- respectively. Further, the loss of income cannot be for three months when it cannot be disputed that the appellant was hospitalized from 1 The dates of accident and ultimate discharge -9- NC: 2025:KHC:20607-DB MFA No. 6799 of 2019 HC-KAR 13.01.2017 till 29.03.2018 though intermittently. It is difficult to accept that the appellant would have worked during this period and therefore is entitled for loss of income during this entire period at the rate of Rs.1,65,000/- [Rs.11,000 x 15 months].
8. Finally, there must be just compensation towards loss of amenities. The Doctor has opined that the appellant's conjugal rights may not be affected by the injury suffered, but the appellant, as a fisherwoman, has suffered fracture not just in the rib area but also in the abdominal area. There would be residual difficulties which would impede the appellant, a sum of Rs.50,000/- would be just compensation under this head. The comparative table of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal and the enhancement granted by this Court in this order would be as under:
- 10 -
NC: 2025:KHC:20607-DB
MFA No. 6799 of 2019
HC-KAR
By the By this Court
Tribunal
[in Rs.]
[in Rs.]
Injury, pain and 40,000.00 50,000.00
sufferings
Medical Expenses 3,74,972.00 3,74,972.00
Loss of earning during 27,000.00 1,65,000.00
treatment/ Laid up
Period]
Conveyance, 20,000.00 50,000.00
nourishment and
attendant charges
Total 4,61,972.00 6,39,972.00
Enhancement 1,78,000.00
For the afore reasons, the following:
ORDER [a] The appeal is allowed in part modifying the Tribunal's Judgment and Award granting an additional compensation of Rs.1,78,000/-
along with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of payment.
[b] The Insurer shall deposit this amount within a period of [6] six weeks from today.
- 11 -
NC: 2025:KHC:20607-DB MFA No. 6799 of 2019 HC-KAR [c] The Registry is directed to draw award accordingly and transmit the Trial Court Records expeditiously.
Sd/-
(B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE Sd/-
(G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE AN/-