Karnataka High Court
Sri Lingaraju K R vs Chandrakanth K on 28 April, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:24560
MFA No. 4099 of 2025
C/W MFA No. 528 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 4099 OF 2025 (MV-I)
C/W
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 528 OF 2025 (MV-I)
IN MFA No. 4099/2025
BETWEEN:
SRI. LINGARAJU K R
S/O. LATE RANGAPA,
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,
SINCE THE PETITIONER IS UNSOUNDED MIND,
HIS WIFE IS REPRESENTING AS A NATURAL
GUARDIAN 1ST FRIEND, BHAGYAMMA,
W/O. LINGARAJU K.R,
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
R/A. KALLUKOTE - 572 139
Digitally signed
by SIRA TOWN, TUMAKURU DISTRICT.
PADMASHREE ...APPELLANT
SHEKHAR
DESAI (BY SRI. SIDDARAMAIAH V.B, ADVOCATE)
Location: High
AND:
Court of
Karnataka
1. CHANDRAKANTH K
S/O. KENCHAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
R/O. UDDARAMANAHALLI VILLAGE,
NADUR POST, GOWDAGERE HOBLI,
SIRA TALUK - 572 135,
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:24560
MFA No. 4099 of 2025
C/W MFA No. 528 of 2025
HC-KAR
TUMAKURU DISTRICT.
2. CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL
INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
OPP. SRIRAM MANDIRA TEMPLE,
6TH FLOOR, GOLDEN HEIGHTS BUILDING,
RAJAJI NAGARA, BENGALURU - 560 010
REP. BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. H.S. LINGARAJ, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH VIDE ORDER DATED
16.04.2026)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.30.8.2024 PASSED IN MVC NO.
588/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND
JMFC, SIRA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR
COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF
COMPENSATION.
IN MFA NO. 528/2025
BETWEEN:
CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL
INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
OPP. SRIRAM MANDIRA TEMPLE,
6TH FLOOR, GOLDEN HEIGHTS BUILDING,
RAJAJI NAGARA, BENGALURU - 560 010
REP. BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER T.P. CLAIMS.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. LINGARAJ H S.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. LINGARAJU K R
NOW AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,
S/O LATE RANGAPPA.
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC:24560
MFA No. 4099 of 2025
C/W MFA No. 528 of 2025
HC-KAR
SINCE OF UNSOUND MIND,
REPRESENTED BY HIS WIFE
AS NATURAL GUARDIAN
AND FRIEND BHAGYAMMA,
AGED ABOUT W/O LINGARAJU K.R.
NOW AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
R/O KALLUKOTE, SIRA TOWN,
TUMAKURU DISTRICT.
2. CHANDRAKANTH K
S/O. KENCHAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
R/O. UDDARAMANAHALLI VILLAGE,
NADUR POST, GOWDAGERE HOBLI,
SIRA TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SIDDARAMAIAH V.B, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
R2 SERVED)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 30.08.2024 PASSED
IN MVC NO.588/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SIRA, AWARDING
COMPENSATION OF RS.12,29,750/- WITH INTEREST AT 6
PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL DEPOSIT.
THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS
DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA
-4-
NC: 2026:KHC:24560
MFA No. 4099 of 2025
C/W MFA No. 528 of 2025
HC-KAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
Both the matters are to be disposed of in one appeal, as both the appeals are filed against the same order, hence, common order is passed in both the appeals.
2. MFA No.4099/2025 is filed by the claimant for enhancement of compensation and MFA No.528/2025 is filed by the Insurance Company under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, challenging the judgment and award dated 30.08.2024 passed in MVC No.588 of 2021, by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Sira.
3. Heard the arguments of both sides.
4. The petitioner/injured claimant met with an accident on 04.03.2021. As he is of unsound mind, his wife, representing him as a natural guardian, filed a claim petition seeking compensation of Rs.15,00,000/-. The Tribunal considering the entire evidence on record granted an amount of Rs.12,29,750/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a., from the date of filing the petition till the date of deposit.
-5-
NC: 2026:KHC:24560 MFA No. 4099 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 528 of 2025 HC-KAR
5. Being aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner filed MFA No.4099/2025 for enhancement of the compensation and mainly contended that the Tribunal erred in considering the disability at 55%, whereas it is to be taken as 100% functional disability to the whole body. The petitioner sustained a head injury, fracture of vertebrae and fractures of ribs. He was doing electrical work and was also an agriculturalist, earning Rs.20,000/- per month. But the Tribunal erred in taking his income at Rs.15,000/- per month. The compensation awarded under other heads is also meagre and the interest ought to have been granted at the rate of 12% per annum. Therefore, requested for enhancement of the compensation.
6. Against the said award, the Insurance Company has also preferred MFA No.528/2025, wherein it is mainly contended that two vehicles were involved in the accident, but the Tribunal failed to consider the negligence on the part of the riders of both vehicles. It is further contended that the Tribunal erred in relying upon the evidence of -6- NC: 2026:KHC:24560 MFA No. 4099 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 528 of 2025 HC-KAR PW.2, who is not a neurosurgeon and therefore not competent to assess the disability. The Tribunal is also erred in granting higher compensation under other heads. Thus, requested for modification of the order.
7. Though the petitioner stated that he was working and earning Rs.20,000/- per month, he has not filed any income proof. As he met with accident in the year 2021, the Tribunal has rightly considered the notional income of Rs.15,000/- per month, as per the chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. As per the medical evidence on record, he was aged 62 years and the relevant multiplier is '7'. The petitioner filed the wound certificate marked as Ex.P.6, clinical summaries under Exs.P.8 and P.9 and discharge summaries under Exs.P.10 and P.11, along with other medical records. The petitioner also examined the doctor as PW.2, who assessed the disability and issued the disability certificate marked as Ex.P.19. The petitioner sustained a head injury with ENT bleeding and vomiting. He was treated as a -7- NC: 2026:KHC:24560 MFA No. 4099 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 528 of 2025 HC-KAR primary consultant and he was clinically examined, intubated and shifted to the ICU. He underwent evaluation with CT scan, X-ray, ECG and routine blood investigations. The CT brain revealed SDH, SAH and diffuse cerebral edema. Hemosinus in both sphenoid, linear fractures in left parietal bone, squamous temporal bone and sphenoid bone. CT scan of the thorax and abdomen showed fractures of the 11th and 12th ribs, compression deformity of the T12 vertebra and fractures of the transverse processes of L1, L2 and L3 vertebrae. X-ray revealed a lateral malleolus fracture of the right ankle. He was given conservative treatment with medication. Consultations from general surgery, orthopaedics and ENT specialists were obtained and their advice was followed. Suturing was done for lacerated wounds and slab was applied. A central line was inserted on 06.03.2021. Dietary counselling and neuro-rehabilitation were also given. PW.2 was not the treated doctor. He examined the petitioner during follow- up visits on 15.04.2023, 25.04.2023 and 28.04.2023 and -8- NC: 2026:KHC:24560 MFA No. 4099 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 528 of 2025 HC-KAR opined that the petitioner had suffered 55% disability with respect to mental illness.
8. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company objected that the disability assessed by PW.2 on the ground that he is qualified in MBBS and MD in forensic medicine and is a forensic surgeon, but not a neurosurgeon and moreover he is not the treated doctor. Therefore, it is argued that the disability assessed by him at 55% ought not to be accepted.
9. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the doctor has assessed the disability at 55% after examining the petitioner and verifying the medical records. The petitioner sustained multiple injuries, including a head injury and therefore, his functional disability is to be considered as 100%. Merely because the doctor is a forensic expert, it cannot be said that he is not competent to assess the disability. Therefore, this Court finds no reason to interfere with the disability assessed by the Tribunal at 55%. As the petitioner was aged 62 years, -9- NC: 2026:KHC:24560 MFA No. 4099 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 528 of 2025 HC-KAR he is not entitled to future prospects. Accordingly, the loss of future earning capacity comes to Rs.6,93,000/- (15,000 × 12 × 7 × 55%). The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.3,76,750/- towards medical expenses and the said amount is confirmed. The petitioner was hospitalized for a period of 13 days on different spells. Considering his age, occupation, nature of injuries and other relevant factors, the Tribunal has awarded loss of income during the laid-up period for six months i.e., Rs.90,000/- and it is also confirmed. The petitioner is entitled to Rs.75,000/- towards pain and suffering, Rs.50,000/- towards loss of amenities and Rs.30,000/- towards transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges.
10. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company in his appeal further stated that the petitioner was under the influence of alcohol at the time of the accident and therefore, contributory negligence is to be assessed on his part. But the same has not been established by submitting any oral or documentary evidence. Hence, the said
- 10 -
NC: 2026:KHC:24560 MFA No. 4099 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 528 of 2025 HC-KAR contention of learned counsel for the Insurance Company cannot be accepted. The Tribunal has rightly fixed the liability on respondent Nos.1 and 2 and directed respondent No.2 to deposit the said amount and it is confirmed.
11. Thus in all, compensation awarded by this Court is as below:
Sl.Nos. Particulars Amount in Rs.
1. Towards pain and suffering 75,000/-
2 Towards medical expenses 3,76,750/-
3 Towards transportation, extra 30,000/-
nourishment and attendant
charges
4. Towards loss of amenities 50,000/-
5 Towards loss of income during 90,000/-
the laid up period
6 Towards loss of future earning 6,93,000 /-
capacity
Total 13,14,750/-
- 11 -
NC: 2026:KHC:24560
MFA No. 4099 of 2025
C/W MFA No. 528 of 2025
HC-KAR
12. Hence, the appellant-claimant is entitled for a total compensation of Rs.13,14,750/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a.
13. In the result, the following order is passed:
ORDER i. MFA No.4099/2025 is allowed in part.
ii. MFA No.528/2025 is dismissed.
iii. The claimant in MFA No.4099/2025 is
entitled to a sum of
Rs.13,14,750/- along with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization, instead of Rs.12,29,750/- granted by the Tribunal. iv. The Insurance Company has deposited only 50% of the compensation and is directed to deposit the balance amount, along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum,
- 12 -
NC: 2026:KHC:24560 MFA No. 4099 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 528 of 2025 HC-KAR within one month from the date of the order.
v. On such deposit, natural guardian of petitioner is permitted to withdraw the entire amount along with interest accrued on the same.
vi. The statutory amount deposited before this Court is to be transferred to MACT. vii. The claimant is not entitled for interest for delayed period of 111 days as per order on I.A.No.1/2025 dated 22.01.2026.
Sd/-
(P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE AMA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 56