Bangalore District Court
Pavan H A vs Hdfc Ergo General Ins Co Ltd on 8 October, 2025
KABC020342202023
IN THE COURT OF III ADDL. JUDGE AND MOTOR
ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL,
BANGALORE (SCCH-18)
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2025
PRESENT: DHANESH MUGALI
B.Com., LL.B.,(Spl.)
III ADDL. JUDGE &
MEMBER, MACT
COURT OF SMALL CAUSES,
BENGALURU.
MVC N0S.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023
Petitioners in MVC 1. Smt.Nethravathi,
No.7151/2023 Wife of Ambaresh H.K.,
Aged about 35 years,
2. Kum.Mahalakshmi H.A.,
Daughter of Ambaresh H.K.,
Aged about 13 years,
3.Pavan H.A.,
Son of Ambaresh H.K.
Aged about 11 years,
The petitioner No.2 & 3 are
minors, hence, represented by
mother and natural guardian
i.e., petitioner No.1.
4. Smt.Sharadamma,
Wife of Krishnappa,
Aged about 59 years,
2 SCCH-18
MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023
5. Shri Krishnappa,
Son of Late Muniyappa,
Aged about 61 years,
All are native of Haripura,
Doddakadathur,
Malur Taluk, Kolar.
Presently residing at No.23,
3rd cross, 2nd main,
Gayathri Layout,
K.R. Puram,
Bengaluru East-560 036.
(By Pleader Shri P.Suresh)
Petitioner in MVC Smt. Netravathi,
7152/2023 Wife of Ambaresh H.K.,
Aged about 35 years, Native of
Haripura, Doddakadathur,
Malur Taluk, Kolar District.
Presently residing at No.23,
3rd cross, 2nd main,
Gayathri Layout,
K.R. Puram,
Bengaluru East-560 036.
(By Pleader Shri P.Suresh)
Petitioner in MVC Master. Pavan H.A.,
No.7725/2023 Son of Ambaresh H.K.
Aged about 12 years, Since
minor, hence, represented by
his mother and natural
guardian Nethravathi, Wife of
Late Ambareesha H.K., Native
of Haripura, Doddakadathur,
Malur Taluk, Kolar District.
Presently residing at No.23,
3rd cross, 2nd main,
Gayathri Layout,
K.R. Puram,
3 SCCH-18
MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023
Bengaluru East-560 036.
(By Pleader Shri P.Suresh )
V/s.
Respondents in all 1. HDFC ERGO General
the cases Insurance Co. Ltd., 2nd Floor,
No.25/1, Building No.2,
Shankaranarayana Building,
M.G. Road,
Bengaluru-560 001.
Represented by its incharge
Manager,
(By Pleader Shri K.Suresh)
2. Y.R. Nandeesha,
Son of Rangaswami, Major,
Residing at Elleshapura,
Halekote-H, Holenarasipura
Taluk, Hassan District.
(Exparte)
3. Syed Awez, Major, Residing
at Hosala in road, 9th cross,
Ilahi Nagar, Near Idga, Hassan
District-573 201.
(Exparte)
COMMON JUDGMENT
The petitioners in MVC No.7151/2023, MVC No.
7152/2023 & MVC No. 7725/2023 have filed the
petitions under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act,
1988 claiming compensation of Rs.60,00,000/- for
the death of Ambaresh K.H. and Rs.25,00,000/- &
Rs.45,00,000/- respectively for the injuries sustained
4 SCCH-18
MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023
by the petitioners in MVC 7152/2023 & 7725/2023
in a road traffic accident.
2. These three petitions are arising out of the
same accident. Hence, these petitions are clubbed
and taken together for common discussion for the
sake of convenience and to avoid the repetition.
The brief facts of the petitioners' case are as
under:
3. That on 25.9.2023 at about 10.45 a.m.
Ambaresh K.H. and the petitioners in MVC
7152/2023 & 7725/2023 were proceeding in a motor
cycle bearing registration No.KA-53-EL-9937, infront
of Bashir Bricks Factory, near Gudanahalli gate,
Malur Tekal road, Malur, Kolar District, very carefully
and cautiously by observing traffic rules, at that time,
driver of the TATA Truck Lorry bearing registration
No.KA-18-B-5484 came with high speed in a rash and
negligent manner and dashed against the motor cycle.
Due to the said impact, deceased Ambaresh K.H. and
the petitioners in MVC No.7152/2023 & MVC
No.7725/2023 were sustained grievous injuries.
Ambaresh died at the spot. This accident occurred
solely due to the rash and negligent act of the driver
of the TATA Trucks lorry bearing registration No.KA-
18-B-5484.
5 SCCH-18
MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023
4. The petitioners in MVC No.7151/2023 were
stated that, the dead body of deceased Ambaresh was
shifted to General Hospital, post mortem was
conducted and the dead body was handed over to the
petitioners. The petitioners have performed funeral
and obsequies by spending huge amount.
5. The petitioners in MVC No.7151/2023 have
further stated that, prior to the accident, deceased
was hale and healthy, aged about 40 years, doing
agriculture and also electrician and earning
Rs.30,000/- per month. Due to the untimely death of
the deceased, petitioners life became dark,
undergoing mental shock and financial loss.
6. The petitioner in MVC No.7152/2023 has
stated that, immediately after the accident she was
shifted to General Hospital, Malur after first aid
treatment she was shifted to Siliconcity Hospital,
Hosakote, Bengaluru, wherein she was taken
treatment as an inpatient. He has spent huge amount
towards treatment, medicines, conveyances, food and
nourishment and other incidental charges.
7. The petitioner in MVC No.7152/2023 has
further stated that, she was hale and healthy, aged
about 35 years, doing tailoring and agriculture and
earning Rs.18,000/- per month. On account of the
injuries sustained in the accident, the petitioner
6 SCCH-18
MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023
could not able to carry out her work. The injuries
sustained in the accident are caused permanent
disability to the petitioner.
8. The guardian of the minor petitioner in MVC
No.7725/2023 has stated that, immediately after the
accident, petitioner was shifted to General Hospital,
Malur after first aid treatment he was shifted to
Siliconcity Hospital, Hosakote. The guardian of the
petitioner has spent huge amount towards treatment,
medicines, conveyances, food and nourishment and
other incidental charges.
9. The guardian of the minor petitioner in MVC
No.7725/2023 has further stated that, petitioner was
hale and healthy, aged about 12 years, student. On
account of the injuries sustained in the accident, the
petitioner could not able to carry out his work. The
injuries sustained in the accident are caused
permanent disability to the petitioner.
10. The petitioners have stated that, the
respondent No.1 being the insurer of the offending
vehicle and respondent No.2 being the owner of the
offending vehicle are jointly and severally liable to pay
the compensation. Upon these grounds, it is prayed
to award compensation as sought for.
7 SCCH-18
MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023
11. In response to notices, respondent No.1 has
appeared through its counsel and filed the written
statement. On the other hand, the respondent No.2 &
3 have not appeared before this court, remained
absent and placed exparte.
12. The respondent No.1 in its written
statement has denied the entire case of the petitioner
as false. It is the defence of the respondent No.1 that,
the driver of the offending vehicle had no valid and
effective driving licence to drive the said vehicle and
the vehicle had no valid permit and FC as on the date
of accident. It is the defence of the respondent that
TATA Motor truck was not at all involved in the
accident. The deceased was died due to self fall from
motor cycle he was riding the motor cycle along with
pillions riders i.e., the petitioners in MVC 7152/2023
& 7725/2023. It is also contended that, the
compensation claimed by the petitioners are excessive
and exhorbitant. Upon these grounds, it is prayed to
dismiss the petition as against the respondent No.1.
13. On the basis of rival pleadings of both the
parties, this court has framed the following issues;
ISSUES IN MVC No.7151/2023
1) Whether the petitioners prove that
Shri Ambaresh K.H. died due to the
injuries sustained in a motor vehicle
accident which was taken place on
8 SCCH-18
MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023
25.9.2023 at about 10.45 a.m., infront
of Bashir Bricks Factory, near
Gudnahalli Gate, Malur-Tekal road,
Malur, Kolar District, due to the rash
and negligent driving of the driver of
the TATA Trucks Lorry bearing
registration No.KA-18-B-5484 in an
actionable negligence?
2) Whether the petitioners prove that
they are the legal heirs and were
depending upon the income of the
deceased?
3) Whether petitioners are entitled for
compensation? If so, at what rate and
from whom?
4) What order or award?
ISSUES IN MVC No.7152/2023
1) Whether the petitioner proves that
she had sustained grievous injuries in a
motor vehicle accident that was taken
place on 25.9.2023 at about 10.45 a.m.,
infront of Bashir Bricks Factory, near
Gudnahalli Gate, Malur-Tekal road,
Malur, Kolar District, due to the rash
and negligent driving of the driver of
the TATA Trucks Lorry bearing
registration No.KA-18-B-5484 in an
actionable negligence?
2) Whether petitioner is entitled for
compensation? If so, at what rate and
from whom?
3) What order or award?
9 SCCH-18
MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023
ISSUES IN MVC No.7725/2023
1) Whether the petitioner proves that he
had sustained grievous injuries in a
motor vehicle accident that was taken
place on 25.9.2023 at about 10.45 a.m.,
infront of Bashir Bricks Factory, near
Gudnahalli Gate, Malur-Tekal road,
Malur, Kolar District, due to the rash
and negligent driving of the driver of the
TATA Trucks Lorry bearing registration
No.KA-18-B-5484 in an actionable
negligence?
2) Whether petitioner is entitled for
compensation? If so, at what rate and
from whom?
3) What order or award?
14. The petitioners in order to prove their case,
petitioner No.1 in MVC 7151/2023 and petitioner in
MVC 7152/2023 & guardian of the minor petitioner
in MVC 7725/2023 are one and the same and
examined as PW1 and got marked the documents at
Ex.P1 to Ex.P51, Ex.P74 to Ex.P78. Further examined
Deputy Manager in Aster CMI hospital as PW1 and
got marked the documents at Ex.P52 to Ex.P56. Apart
from their evidence placed the evidence of MRD of
Manipal Hospital as PW3 and got marked the
documents at Ex.P57 & Ex.P58. Further examined
MRD of Siliconcity Hospital as PW4 and got marked
the documents at Ex.P59 to Ex.P62. In addition to
10 SCCH-18
MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023
their evidence placed the evidence of Dr.H.V.Satish
Babu as PW5 and got marked the documents at
Ex.P63 to Ex.P67. Further examined Dr.B.Manjunath
as PW6 and got marked the documents at Ex.P68 &
Ex.P69. Thereafter examined Dr.Chidanand K.J.C. as
PW7 and got marked the documents at Ex.P70 to
Ex.P73.
15. On the other hand, the respondent No.1 has
not examined any witness on its behalf. At the same
time, the respondent No.2 & 3 were placed exparte.
16. Heard arguments on both sides and perused
the materials available on record.
17. The answers to the above issues are as
under:
In MVC No.7151/2023:
Issue No.1 : In the Affirmative
Issue No.2 : In the Affirmative
Issue No.3 :Partly in the Affirmative
Issue No.4: As per the final order
In MVC No.7152/2023:
Issue No.1 : In the Affirmative
Issue No.2 :Partly in the Affirmative
Issue No.3 : As per the final order
In MVC No.7725/2023:
Issue No.1 :In the Affirmative
11 SCCH-18
MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023
Issue No.2 :Partly in the Affirmative
Issue No.3 :As per the final order
for the following:
R E A S O N S
ISSUE No.1 IN ALL THE CASES:-
18. It is the case of the petitioners that, due to
the actionable negligence on the part of the driver of
the TATA Truck Lorry bearing registration No.KA-18-
B-5484 the alleged accident had taken place.
Consequently, Ambaresh K.H. died in the accident
and the petitioners in MVC 7152/2023 & 7725/2023
were sustained injuries.
19. On the other hand, the respondent No.1
being the insurance company, though not disputed
the accident and death of Ambaresh K.H. and the
injuries sustained by the petitioners in MVC
7152/2023 & 7725/2023, seriously disputed the
manner of accident. In such a situation, burden is
more on the part of the court to assess the evidence
available on record, in order to come to the proper
conclusion in connection with the above fact in issue.
20. The petitioners to discharge the burden lies
on them, relied on the affidavit evidence of petitioner
No.1 in MVC 7151/2023, petitioner in MVC
7152/2023 & guardian of the minor petitioner in
MVC 7725/2023 are one and the same by name
12 SCCH-18
MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023
Nethravathi and examined as PW1. PW1 reiterated
the main petition averments with regard to the
accident. She has relied upon the documents marked
at Ex.P1 to Ex.P11, Ex.P13 & Ex.P25.
21. On going through the documents available
on record, Ex.P1-true copy of the FIR in
Cr.No.406/2023 of Malur police station for the
offences punishable under section 279, 337 & 304(A)
of IPC. Ex.P2-true copy of the first information
statement given by one Srinivasa K. Ex.P3-true copy
of further statement. Ex.P4-true copy of spot
mahazar, Ex.P5-true copy of spot sketch, Ex.P6-true
copy of inquest, Ex.P7-notice u/s 133 of MV Act,
Ex.P8-replyt to notice u/s 133 of MV Act, Ex.P9-true
copy of IMV report, Ex.P10-true copy of charge sheet,
Ex.P11-true copy of PM report, Ex.P13-true copy of
wound certificate of petitioner in MVC 7152/2023
and Ex.P25-true copy of wound certificate of
petitioner in MVC 7725/2023.
22. On perusal of the police documents, it could
be seen that, based upon the first information
statement given by one Srinivasa K., the S.H.O. of
Malur police Station has registered the case against
the driver of the offending vehicle for the offences
punishable under Sections 279, 337 & 304(A) of
I.P.C. Upon investigation, the I.O. has filed charge
sheet against the driver of the offending vehicle
13 SCCH-18
MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023
alleging that he has committed the offences
punishable under section 279, 338 and 304(A) of IPC.
23. The respondent No.1 contended that the
accident occurred due to the negligence of deceased
Ambaresh, who himself fell from his motor cycle along
with petitioner in MVC 7152/2023 & 7725/2023, but
not made an effort either to examine the driver of the
offending vehicle or any of the independent eye
witness who witnessed the alleged accident to prove
his contention.
24. Though the PW1 was subjected for cross-
examination at length, but nothing has been elicited
from her mouth to prove that this accident is not due
to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the TATA
truck lorry.
25. From the oral evidence of PW1 coupled with
police documents, it is no doubt that, the deceased
Ambaresh K.H. died in the said accident and the
petitioners in MVC No.7152/2023 & MVC
No.7725/203 were sustained injuries in the accident,
which is result of rash and negligent driving of the
driver of the TATA Truck lorry bearing registration
No.KA-18-B-5484. Hence, I am of the view that, the
petitioners have placed satisfactory and acceptable
evidence to prove the above issue. Accordingly, issue
No.1 in all the cases is answered in the
Affirmative.
14 SCCH-18
MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023
ISSUE No.2 & 3 in MVC 7151/2023:
26. Now coming to the point of quantum of
compensation for which the petitioners are entitled,
every legal representative who suffers on account of the
death of a person, due to a motor vehicle accident, should
have remedy for realization of compensation. Since in the
death case, the legal heirs are the claimants. In the case
on hand, the relationship of deceased with the
petitioners is not in dispute. At the same time, the
documents produced by the petitioners to prove their
relationship with the deceased placed Aadhar cards of
the deceased and the petitioners, which are marked
at Ex.P46 to Ex.P51 are not disputed by the other
side. The recitals of the above documents clearly
speak about the relationship between the petitioners
and the deceased.
27. Another aspect to be considered herein that,
on going through the age particulars of the petitioners
mentioned in the cause title of the petition, reflected
that, the petitioner No.1 being the wife has lost the
love and affection of her husband, petitioner No.2 & 3
are the children of the deceased has lost the love and
affection of their father and the petitioner No.4 & 5
are parents of the deceased have lost the love and
affection of their son, who is the backbone of the
family.
15 SCCH-18
MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023
28. The petitioners to prove the actual age of
the deceased as on the date of the accident have
placed his Aadhar card at Ex.P46. On going through
same, the date of birth of the deceased has been
mentioned as 16.7.1984. The said document
remained unquestioned by the other side. The alleged
accident had occurred on 25.9.2023. Hence, it is
safely to be considered that, as on the date of the
accident, the deceased was aged about 39 years. For
his age, multiplier '15' is applicable as per the ratio
laid down in "Sarala Verma" Case.
29. In connection with the work of the deceased,
in the main petition and also in the evidence of PW1
stated that, deceased was doing agriculture and
electrician work and earning income of Rs.30,000/-
per month. The petitioners have placed job details
certificate at Ex.P45. On perusal of the same, it shows
that the petitioner was working as an electrician and
earning Rs.20,000/- per month. To prove the said
fact the petitioners have not examined author of the
document. Except production of this document she
has not placed any acquaintance roll to show that
deceased was working as an electrician at
Raghavendra Electricals. Hence, in the absence of the
definite income of the deceased, it is opt to consider
the notional income as per law. It is pertinent to note
that, the alleged accident had taken place in the year
16 SCCH-18
MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023
2023. By keeping in mind about the year of the
accident and also notional income chart, I am of the
view that, it is apt to take the notional income of the
petitioner as Rs.16,000/- for the year 2023.
30. Apart from this, it is also relevant to
discuss, that the Honourable Supreme Court in the
decision reported in,
2018 SAR (Civil) 81. National Insurance
Company Limited V/s Pranay Sethi and others,
" It was observed that, "While determining the
income, an addition of 50 per cent of actual
salary to the income of the deceased towards
future prospects, where the deceased had a
permanent job and was below the age of 40
years, should be made. The addition should be
30 per cent, if the age of the deceased was
between 40 and 50 years. In case the deceased
was between the age of 50 and 60 years, the
addition should be 15 per cent. Actual salary
should be read as actual salary less tax. In
case the deceased was self-employed or on a
fixed salary, an addition of 40 per cent of the
established income should be the warrant
where the deceased was below the age of 40
year. An addition of 25 per cent where the
deceased was between the age of 40 to 50
years. An addition of 25 per cent where the
deceased was between the age of 40 and 50
years and 10 per cent where the deceased was
17 SCCH-18
MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023
between the age of 50-60 years should be
regarded as the necessary method of
computation. The established income means
the income minus the tax component. "
31. Having considered the above, as per law
laid down in the above case, in connection with the
deduction of personal and living expenses is
concerned, it is settled that, "where the deceased was
married, the deduction towards personal and living
expenses of the deceased should be one third (1/3 rd) where
the number of dependent family members is 2 to 3, 1/4 th
where the number of dependent family member is 4 to 6
and one fifth (1/5th ) where the number of the dependant
family members exceeds six."
32. In the light of the above proposition, in the
case on hand, there are four persons were depending
upon the income of the deceased. Hence, as per the
principle laid down by the Honourable Supreme
Court in Sarala Verma Case at para No.14, 1/4th
has to be deducted towards personal and living
expenses out of the total compensation.
33. In the present case, deceased was aged
about 39 years as on the date of the accident. For
this age multiplier "15" is applicable. And by relying
on the aforesaid principle laid down in the Pranay
Sethi's case with respect to the age of the deceased
and also on going through the nature of the
occupation forthcoming in the petition averments, it
18 SCCH-18
MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023
is evident that, the deceased herein is not having
permanent job and accurate income for
consideration. As such, deceased comes under the
purview of below 40 years, 40% income of the
deceased has to be taken into account towards future
prospects. Therefore, by considering the earning of
the deceased as Rs.16,000/- per month. And
Rs.1,92,000/- per year. Along with this, the future
prospects of 40% is to be taken in to consideration,
then the annual income of the deceased comes to
(Rs.1,92,000+76,800) = Rs.2,68,800/-. And 1/4th
has to be deducted towards personal and living
expenses in the income of the deceased. Thus, net
loss of income comes to Rs.2,01,600/-
(Rs.2,68,800-Rs.67,200). This income has to be
multiplied by multiplier "15" which comes to
Rs.30,24,000/-.
34. Apart from this aspect, in connection with
the loss of estate, consortium and with respect to the
funeral expenses to calculate the quantum of the
compensation under the aforesaid heads, it is
relevant to note herein the following authority,
2018 SAR (Civil) 81. National Insurance Company
Limited. V/s Pranay Sethi and others,
The Hon'ble Apex Court discussed
various aspects in connection with the
claim petition filed by the claimants for
19 SCCH-18
MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023
compensation. And also observed that
while determining the claim petition,
the reasonable figures on conventional
heads, viz., loss of estate, loss of
consortium and funeral expenses should
be Rs.15,000/-, Rs.40,000/- and
Rs.15,000/- respectively. The aforesaid
amount should be enhanced at the rate
of 10% in every three years.
35. By relying upon the above said decision of
the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the amount of
Rs.16,500/- is awarded under the head loss of estate
and Rs.16,500/- is awarded towards funeral expenses
and also by placing reliance upon the decision of
Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in (2018) 18 SCC 130
between Magma General Insurance Company Limited
v/s Nanu Ram alias Chuhru Ram & Others, the
amount of Rs.44,000/- each is awarded to the
petitioner No.1 to 5 under the head loss of
consortium.
36. Considering the above facts and
circumstances of the case and for the above reason, I
am of the opinion that, the petitioners are entitled for
total compensation under the following heads.
Compensation heads Compensation
Amount
Towards loss of Rs.30,24,000-00
dependency
20 SCCH-18
MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023
Towards loss of Rs. 2,20,000-00
consortium
Towards loss of estate Rs. 16,500-00
Towards funeral & Rs. 16,500-00
obsequies ceremony
expenses
Total Rs.32,77,000-00
37. Accordingly, the petitioners herein are
entitled to get total compensation of Rs.32,77,000/-
(Rupees thirty two lakhs seventy seven thousand
only), along with the interest at the rate of 6% per
annum, as per the proposition laid down by the
Honourable High court of Karnataka in MFA No.
103557/2016, Between Sri Ram General Insurance
Company Limited V/S. Lakshmi And Others dated.
20.03.2018. And MFA No.30131/2019 dated.12.5.2020
from the date of petition till its realisation.
ISSUE No.2 IN MVC No.7152/2023;
38. This issue is with respect to the entitlement
of reliefs claimed by the petitioner. The petitioner has
filed this petition on account of the injuries sustained
by her in the accident under different heads.
39. Before appreciation of the evidence placed
by the petitioner about the injuries sustained by her,
in the accident and its consequences, it is apt to note
herein, the preposition laid down in the following
21 SCCH-18
MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023
land mark judgment while appreciating the injury
cases in Motor Vehicle Act.
Civil Appeal No.8981/2010 D.D. 18.10.2010
Rajkumar V/s Ajay Kumar & Another of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court of India.
"In the aforesaid case, it was held that,
the court has to make judicious attempt to
award compensation to the loss suffered by the
claimant. The compensation should not be
assessed conservatively. On the other hand,
compensation should also not be endeavouring
to secure some uniformity and consistency.
The object of awarding compensation is to
make good the loss suffered as a result of
wrong done, as far as money can do so, in a
fair reasonable and equitable manner." "while
determining quantum of compensation, in such
cases, the court has to strike a balance
between the inflated and unreasonable
demands of a victim and the equally untenable
claim of the opposite party saying that
nothing is payable. That sympathy for the
victim does not, and should not, comes in the
way of making a correct assessment. But if a
case is made out, and the court must not be
chary of awarding adequate compensation. "
Pain and Sufferings;
40. PW1 has stated in her evidence that, she
has sustained the injuries in a road traffic accident.
22 SCCH-18
MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023
In connection with the injuries she has produced the
wound certificate which is marked at Ex.P16. The
said document discloses that, she had sustained the
following injuries:-
1) Right leg femur lower 1/3rd fracture
2) Right proximal tibia open fracture
3) Leg proximal tibia open fracture
4) Left maxilla facial injury
41. In connection with the above said injuries
the doctor is of the opinion that the said injuries are
greivous in nature. The petitioner has produced
dischrge summary, OPD, Laboratory report, x-rays
photographs, and CD at Ex.P14 to E.P16, Ex.P19 to
Ex.P24. Apart from her evdience placed the evidence
of medical record officer as PW4. He has placed
authorisation letter, case sheet at Ex.P59 & Ex.P60.
Furthr placed the evidence of Dr.B.Manjunath as
PW6. He has placed police intimation ad MLC extract
at Ex.P68 & Ex.P69. In addition to her evidence,
placed the evidence of Dr.Chidanand K.J.C. as PW7.
He has stated in his evidence that, petitioner has
sustained right femur lower 1/3 fracture, right
proximal tibia open fracture, left proximal tibia open
fracture, head injury and left maxilafacial injury. He
has placed outpatient record and x-rays at Ex.P70 &
Ex.P71. On perusal of discharge summary marked at
Ex.P14 issued by Siliconcity Hospital reveals that, she
23 SCCH-18
MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023
was admitted from 25.9.2023 to 14.10.2023,
30.10.2023 to 1.11.2023, 14.11.2023 to 18.11.2023.
By taking into consideration of the nature of the
injuries and the treatment taken by the petitioner,
she could have undergone pain and sufferings while
taking treatment. Hence, the petitioner is entitled for
compensation of Rs.50,000/- under the head of
Pain and Sufferings.
Loss of income during treatment period:
42. PW1 has stated that, she was working as a
tailor and agricultural labourer and earning
Rs.18,000/- per month. There is no iota of documents
to show her avocation and income. In the absence of
the documents, it is apt to consider the notional
income. On perusal of discharge summary marked at
Ex.P14 issued by Siliconcity Hospital reveals that, she
was admitted from 25.9.2023 to 14.10.2023,
30.10.2023 to 1.11.2023, 14.11.2023 to 18.11.2023
By considering the nature of the injuries sustained by
the petitioner during the period of treatment
definitely, there was some difficulty to her to do daily
routine work and to do her work for livelihood at least
for a period of three months by looking in to the
nature of the injuries sustained by her. Hence, I am
of the view that, it is just and proper to award
compensation of Rs.48,000/- towards loss of
income during the laid up period and rest period.
24 SCCH-18
MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023
Medial Expeneses;
43. The petitioner in connection with his
treatment expenses, at the time of her evidence
placed medical bills of Rs.8,98,466/- as per Ex.P17
along with prescriptions as per Ex.P18. At the time of
cross-examination of PW1, except the suggestion that,
the medical bills are created, nothing worthwhile is
elicited to disbelieve the same. Hence, the petitioner is
entitled for compensation of Rs.8,98,466/- towards
medical expenses.
Attendant charges, food and nourishment
and conveyance charges;
44. As per the medical records and also on
going through the documents, the petitioner has
taken treatment as an outpatient, definitely the
petitioner could have spent some amount towards,
food, nourishment, conveyance, as well as towards
attendant charges. Hence, the petitioner is entitled for
compensation of Rs.30,000/- towards attendant
charges, food, nourishment and conveyance
charges.
Loss of future income;
45. The petitioner herein, asserting that, she
had sustained permanent disability, consequent upon
the injuries sustained by her in a road traffic
25 SCCH-18
MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023
accident. In order to prove the same, the petitioner
has relied on her evidence along with the discharge
summary and other medical documents. In the
evidence of PW1, reiterated the same thing
forthcoming in the main petition. As already
discussed above, the wound certificate placed by her,
as per Ex.P13 goes to show that, she had sustained
grievous injuries. Apart from this, another material
witness by name Dr.Chidanand K.J.C. has examined
as PW7. PW7 has stated in his evidence that the
petitioner has sustained injuries right right femur
lower 1/3 fracture, right proximal tibia open fracture,
left proximal tibia open fracture, head injury and left
maxilafacial injury. For which, she underwent right
femur nailing and plating for right tibia and nailing
for left tibia.
46. On recent examination of the petitioner, she
had right hip knee and left ankle restricted, healed
scar mark over hip and right knee, quadriceps
wasting, pain on movements of knee hip. X-ray
shows left tibia fracture united with implant in situ,
right leg and femur shows fracture united with
implant in situ.
47. On the basis of entire evaluation of the
disability of the petitioner, PW7 had opined that,
physical disability of lower limb is 33% and whole
26 SCCH-18
MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023
body is 11%. In support of his evidence placed OPD
book, and x-ray at Ex.P70 & Ex.P71.
48. At the time of cross-examination of PW7,
admitted that he is not the treated doctor. This
witness also denied the suggestion that, he assessed
the disability of the petitioner in higher side.
49. Over all appreciation of evidence of PW7
along with the entire medical documents the
wholebody disability expressed by PW7 seems to be
correct. Hence, by taking into consideration of point
of disability expressed by PW7 along with the point
that, fractures are united, it is considered the
disability as 11%. The same will meets the ends of
justice.
50. In connection with the age of the petitioner
is concerned, on going through the cause title of the
petition reveals that, as on the date of the petition,
her age was 35 years. In support of the age proof, she
has placed Aadhar card marked at Ex.P47 for
consideration. On going through the said document,
the date of birth of the petitioner has been mentioned
as 19.6.1987. The accident occurred on 25.9.2023.
Therefore, as on the date of accident, the age of the
petitioner is considered as 36 years. To the said age
as per Sarla Verma case, multiplier '15' is to be
taken into consideration.
27 SCCH-18
MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023
51. Next factual aspect of the income of the
petitioner is concerned, in her evidence the petitioner
has stated that, prior to the accident, she was doing
agriculture and tailoring work and getting an income
of Rs.18,000/- per month. In support of her
avocation, and definite income per month, she has
not placed any iota of documents. In such a situation,
as per law notional income has to be taken into
consideration. But the said notional income is to be
taken judiciously, by taking into consideration of the
year of the accident. It is pertinent to note that, in the
case on hand, the alleged accident had taken place in
the year 2023. As per the notional income chart, I am
of the view that, it is apt to take the notional income of
the petitioner as Rs.16,000/- for the year 2023.
52. In the light of my detailed discussions held
above, no doubt injuries sustained by the petitioner,
definitely come in the way of her future, in a slight
manner, to do her daily routine work, as well as to do
her work for livelihood. Hence, the petitioner herein, is
entitled for compensation under loss of future income
as follows:
Rs.16,000 X 12 X 15 X11/100= Rs.3,16,800/-.
Loss of amenities;
53. PW1 has stated in her evidence that due to
the accidental injuries he is unable to walk, run,
28 SCCH-18
MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023
stand, sit, unable to lift weight, now getting pain at
fracture site. On perusal of evidence of PW7 and also
medical documents, I am of the view that, the
petitioner will suffer a slight problem in future also, to
do her normal work, as well as her work for
livelihood. Hence, it is just and proper to award
compensation of Rs.30,000/- towards loss of
amenities.
Future Medication;
54. In connection with the future medication,
PW7 has stated that the petitioner rrequires one more
surgery for removal of implan at an approximate cost
of Rs.30,000/-. Either PW1 or PW7 has not placed
any estimation in this regard. On perusal of the
nature of injuries and escalation of rates in the field
of medicines, it is just and proper to award
compensation of Rs.20,000/- under the head of
future medical expenses.
55. In view of my discussions held above, on
various aspects the petitioner is entitled for
compensation in toto, under the following heads:
Compensation heads Compensation
amount
1.Pain and Suffering Rs. 50,000-00
2.Loss of income during Rs. 48,000-00
laid-up period and rest
29 SCCH-18
MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023
period
3. Medical expenses Rs.8,98,466-00
4. Attendant, Nourishment Rs. 30,000-00
and Conveyance Charges
5. Loss of future income Rs.3,16,800-00
6. Loss of Amenities Rs. 30,000-00
7. Future medication Rs. 20,000-00
Total Rs.13,93,266-00
56. Accordingly, the petitioner is entitled for
compensation of Rs.13,93,266/- (Rupees thirteen
lakhs ninetythree thousand two hundred and sixty
six only), along with interest @ 6% per annum from
the date of the petition till the realization of the award
amount.
ISSUE No.2 in MVC 7725/2023;
57. This issue is with respect to the entitlement
of relief claimed by the petitioner. The petitioner
through this petition claiming compensation of
Rs.45,00,000/- on account of the injuries sustained
by him in the accident, under different heads.
58. In connection with the injuries sustained by
the petitioner, during the evidence of the natural
guardian mother of the minor petitioner has produced
the wound certificate of the minor petitioner. The said
document marked at Ex.P25, reveals that, the minor
30 SCCH-18
MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023
petitioner had sustained the following injuries,
consequent upon the Road Traffic Accident.
1) Severe Head injury + Pittule axonal injury
2) Left femur shaft (mid shaft) open fracture
Degloving injury of thigh and leg
3) Poly trauma.
59. According to the doctor, the said injuries
are grievous in nature. Apart from this, mother of the
petitioner, during the course of her evidence placed
discharge summaries, OPD, Brancoscopy, laboratory
report, x-rays, photographs, C.D. discharge summary,
outpatient record, lab reports, at Ex.P26 to Ex.P30,
Ex.P33 to Ex.P44 and Ex.P74 to Ex.76 for
consideration. PW2 being the MRO of Aster CMI
hospital placed authorisation letter, case sheets and
x-ray at Ex.P52 to Ex.P56. Further PW3 being the
MRO of Manipal hospital placed authorisation letter
and inpatient record at Ex.P58. PW4-MRO of
Siliconcity Hospital placed authorisation letter and
case sheets at Ex.P61 & Ex.P62. In addition to their
evidence placed the evidence of Dr.H.V.Satish Babu
as PW5. He has stated in his evdience that the
petitioner has sustained diffuse axonal injury, facial
injury left femur shaft fracture degloving injury of left
lower limb, x-ray shows diffuse axonal injury, the
petitioner glasgow coma scale was E2M3VI, which
was indicative of a severe head injury. The petitioner
31 SCCH-18
MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023
was managed conservatively. The petitioner
underwent closed reduction with TENS nailing of left
femur shaft and debridement and primary closure.
He has placed outpatient record, psychological
assessment report, CT scan report,
electroencephalogram and CT scan at Ex.P63 to
Ex.P67. PW6 being the CMO of General Hospital,
Malur has placed police intimation and MLC at
Ex.P68 & Ex.P69. Further placed the evidence of
Dr.Chidanand K.J.C. as PW7. He has stated in his
evidence that the petitioner has sustained left femur
shaft open fracture with degloving injury of thigh and
leg and head injury diffuse axonal injury. He has
placed outpatient record and x-ray at Ex.P72 &
Ex.P73.
60. Apart from this, it is to be noted that, as
per Ex.P49-Aadhar card, her date of birth has been
mentioned as 15.4.2011. The accident occurred on
25.9.2023. If the said date is taken into
consideration, as on the date of the accident, the
petitioner was aged about 12 years. Ex.P26 and
Ex.P74 discharge summaries of the minor petitioner
speaks that, he was admitted as an inpatient in
various hospital. It means he took treatment in the
hospital on the history of RTA from 25.9.2023 to
21.11.2023, 17.11.2023 to 19.11.2023, 1.12.2023 to
3.12.2023, 5.12.2023 to 7.12.2023, 19.3.2024 to
32 SCCH-18
MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023
21.3.2024, 1.7.2024 to 1.7.l2024 and from 7.5.2025
to 8.5.2025.
61. To prove the injuries sustained by the minor
petitioner material evidence placed on record is the
evidence of Dr. H.V.Satish Babu, neurosurgeon at
Columbia Hospital, Bengaluru as PW5. The said
witness is not the treated doctor of the minor
petitioner, deposed that, on the history of RTA, the
petitioner had sustained diffuse axonal injury, facial
injury left femur shaft fracture degloving injury of left
lower limb, x-ray shows diffuse axonal injury, the
petitioner glasgow coma scale was E2M3VI, which
was indicative of a severe head injury . The petitioner
underwent various treatment, during his stay in the
hospital he was kept under close observation, he was
given antibiotics, anticonvulsant and anti edema
medication till he showed improvement. PW5 has
further stated that, petitioner has decreased memory
to the extent of 25%, he makes mistakes in
recollecting names, objects nearly 25% of time,
dimness of vision in both eyes to extent of 25%
unsteady gait with tendency to fall to sides, mild loss
of smell to extent of 25% . After assessment of all the
medical documents, this witness opined that, the
petitioner is having 43.05% disability, this is
permanent in nature. During the course of cross-
examination of this witness, admitted that, he is the
33 SCCH-18
MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023
treated doctor and he has not assessed the particular
limb disability. Further denied the suggestion that
petitioner is aged about 13 years, hence, he can
recover from medical treatment and physiotherapy
treatment and also denied that the petitioner is not
having any problem and only to help the petitioner he
assess the disability in higher side.
62. As per psychological assessement report at
Ex.P64 the petitioner is functioning inapprorpiate on
test in the category of "low average intelligence. He
has attention deficit disorder with oppositional
defiance disorder. He has learning disability in
reading, spelling, writing, comprehension and math.
Therapy to improve his academics aqnd
concentrationas well as for his behaviour issues.
63. Further the material evidence placed on
record is the evidence of Dr.Chidanand K.J.C.
Orthopaedic surgeon as PW7. He has stated that the
petitioner has sustained left femur shaft open
fracture with degloving injury of thigh and leg and
head injury diffuse axonal injury. On examination of
the petitioner on 19.3.2025 the petitioner has range
of movements of knee, hip restricted, quadriceps
wasting is seen secondary healing around knee joint,
painful hip and knee joint line. X-ray shows fracture
united with implant in situ. PW7 has assessed the
disability whole body from lower limb is 13%.
34 SCCH-18
MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023
64. Over all appreciation of the medical
documents of the petitioner along with the evidence of
PW5 & PW7, I am of the view that, the petitioner has
sustained grievous injuries. By looking into the age
criteria of the petitioner, I am of the view that it is apt
to take the whole body disability of the petitioner as
50%. The same will meet the ends of justice.
65. Apart from this aspect, it is pertinent to
discuss that, in case of minor victims of accident, it is
very difficult to assess the loss of future income. In
this regard, it is necessary to note the authority,
reported in:
A.I.R 2014 S.C Page 736 between Master
Mallikarjun v/s Divisional Manager, The National
Insurance Company Ltd., and Another,
In the aforesaid case, the Hon'ble
Supreme Court was pleased to observe
that, though it is difficult to have an
accurate assessment of compensation in
the case of children suffering disability on
account of a motor vehicle accident,
having regarding to the relevant factors,
precedents and the approach of various
High Court, that the appropriate
compensation on all other heads in
addition to the actual expenditure for
treatment, attendant etc., should be if the
disability is above 10% and up to 30% to
35 SCCH-18
MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023
the whole body Rs.3,00,000/- up to 60%
Rs.4,00,000/- up to 90%, Rs.5,00,000/-
and above 90% it should be
Rs.6,00,000/-. For permanent disability
up to 10%, it should be Rs.1,00,000/-
unless there are exceptional
circumstances to take different yardstick.
66. In the present case, in connection with the
loss of income is concerned, on going through the
evidence of PW5 & PW7 and other medical documents
pertaining to the petitioner reveals that the petitioner
is having permanent disability consequent upon the
injuries sustained by him in the accident as fully
discussed above. And also on going through the
nature of the injuries sustained by the minor
petitioner as per the wound certificate, definitely he
being a minor child, could have undergone pain and
sufferings. That cannot be fully compensated in terms
of money. But, if some amount has been awarded
under the head of the pain and suffering on the
concept of just compensation and also, by relying the
principle laid down in the above authority, will meet
the ends of justice. Accordingly the minor petitioner is
entitled for compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- towards
pain and sufferings already undergone and to be
suffered in future, mental and physical hardship,
inconvenience and discomforts etc., and loss of
36 SCCH-18
MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023
amenities in life on account of injuries and
discomfort.
67. Further, on going through the medical
documents pertaining to the injured, and also looking
to the mode of treatment given to the petitioner, and
also on perusal of the entire medical documents of
the minor petitioner, along with the point forthcoming
in the discharge summary that, he took treatment in
various hospitals from 25.9.2023 to 21.11.2023,
17.11.2023 to 19.11.2023, 1.12.2023 to
3.12.2023, 5.12.2023 to 7.12.2023, 19.3.2024 to
21.3.2024, 1.7.2024 to 1.7.l2024 and from
7.5.2025 to 8.5.2025, I am of the view that, the
minor petitioner is entitle for compensation of
Rs.80,000/- under the head of discomfort,
inconvenience and loss of earnings to the parents,
during the period of hospitalization of the minor.
68. In connection with the medical expenses is
concerned, the PW1, at the time of her evidence,
placed medical bills of Rs.14,82,425/- marked at
Ex.P31 along with prescriptions at Ex.P32. Further
placed another medical bills of Rs.95,314/- at Ex.P77
along with prescriptions at Ex.P78. In toto it comes
to Rs.15,77,739/-. The said medical bills have not
been seriously disputed by the other side.
Considering the same, I am of the opinion that, the
petitioner is entitled for compensation of
37 SCCH-18
MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023
Rs.15,77,739/- under the head of medical
expenses.
69. Further, by considering the nature of
injuries sustained by the minor, I am of the opinion
that the parents of the minor petitioner could have
spent some amount towards food, nourishment and
transportation charges. Hence, a compensation of
Rs.70,000/- may be awarded under the head of food
and nourishment transportation and other
incidental expenses.
70. In connection with the future medication
expenses of the minor petitioner is concerned, PW7
has stated that petitioner requires one more surgery
for removal of implant, which cost of Rs.30,000/-. By
considering the nature of the injuries, it is just and
proper to award compensation of Rs.20,000/- under
the head of future medication.
Compensation heads Compensation
amount
1. Pain and Suffering already Rs. 4,00,000-00
undergone and to be suffered
in future, mental and physical
hardship, inconvenience and
discomforts etc., and loss of
amenities in life on account of
injuries and discomfort
2. Under the head of Rs. 80,000-00
discomforts, inconvenience
and loss of earnings to the
parents during the period of
38 SCCH-18
MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023
hospitalisation of the minor
3. Medical expenses Rs.15,77,739-00
4. Food and Nourishment, Rs. 70,000-00
Conveyance Charges and
other incidental charges
5. Future medication Rs. 20,000-00
Total Rs.21,47,739-00
71. From the above discussion, I am of the
opinion that the minor petitioner is entitled for total
compensation of Rs.21,47,739/- (Rupees twenty
one lakhs forty seven thousand seven hundred
and thirty nine only) with interest at the rate of
along with interest @ 6% per annum, from the date
of the petition, till the realization of the award
amount.
LIABILITY:
72. As regards the liability is concerned,
accident has not been seriously disputed by the other
side. The evidence given by the petitioners that, due
to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the
TATA trucks lorry bearing registration No.KA-18-B-
5484 remained unshaken.
73. As per the records, the issuance of policy in
respect of vehicle bearing registration No.KA-18-B-
5484 valid from 14.7.2023 to 13.7.2024. The
39 SCCH-18
MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023
accident was occurred on 25.9.2023. Therefore, as
on the date of accident policy was in force. Hence, the
respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay the
compensation. In view of the valid insurance policy
the respondent No.1 is liable to pay the compensation
with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till
its realization. Accordingly, I am answering the issue
No.2 in all the cases partly in the Affirmative.
ISSUE No.4 in MVC 7151/2023 & ISSUE No.
3 in MVC 7152/2023 & 7725/2023;
74. In view of the above discussions on issue
No.1 to 3 in MVC 7151/2023 & issue No.1 & 2 in
MVC 7152/2023 & 7725/2023, I proceed to pass the
following;
O R D E R
The claim petitions filed by the respective petitioners in MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023 under section 166 of M.V. Act, are hereby partly allowed with costs.
The petitioners are entitled for compensation amount as noted below with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petitions till the date of deposit.
MVC No.7151/2023 Rs.32,77,000-00 MVC No.7152/2023 Rs.13,93,266-00 40 SCCH-18 MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023 MVC No.7725/2023 Rs.21,47,739-00 The respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation. In view of the valid insurance policy the respondent No.1 is liable to pay compensation to the petitioners with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization within two months from the date of this order.
Out of the compensation amount awarded to the petitioners together with interest in MVC No.7151/2023, the petitioner No.1 is entitled the share of 50%, the petitioner No.2 & 3 are entitled the share of 15% each and the petitioner No.4 & 5 are entitled the share of 10% each.
Out of the compensation amount awarded to the petitioners together with interest in MVC No.7151/2023, the petitioner No.1, shall deposit 40% of her share in any Nationalized/Scheduled bank of her choice for a period of 3 years and remaining 60% shall be released to her through due process of law. 41 SCCH-18 MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023 Out of the compensation amount awarded to the petitioner No.2 & 3 in MVC 7151/2023 together with interest, entire amount shall be deposited in any Nationalised bank or Scheduled bank till they attain age of majority, after attaining the age of majority entire amount shall be released to the petitioners through due process of law. The guardian of the minor petitioners is at liberty to withdraw the periodical interest accrued on their deposit amount from time to time.
Out of the compensation amount awarded to the petitioner No.4 & 5 in MVC 7151/2023, since the award amount is very meagre, entire amount shall be released to them through due process of law.
With regard to the compensation amount together with interest in MVC No.7152/2023, the petitioner shall deposit 40% of her share in any Nationalized/Scheduled bank of her choice for a period of 3 years and remaining 60% shall be released to her through due process of law.
42 SCCH-18 MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023 With regard to the compensation amount together with interest in MVC No.7725/2023 entire amount shall be deposited in any Nationalised bank or Scheduled bank till he attains age of majority, after attaining the age of majority entire amount shall be released to the petitioner through due process of law. The guardian of the minor petitioner is at liberty to withdraw the periodical interest accrued on his deposit amount from time to time.
The expenses to be incurred for future medication in MVC No.7152/2023 & 7725/2023 shall not carry any interest.
The original judgment shall be kept in MVC No.7151/2023 and copy of the same shall be kept in MVC No.7152/2023 & 7725/2023.
Advocate fee is fixed at Rs.1000/- each.
Draw award accordingly.
(Dictated to stenographer directly on computer, corrected by me and then pronounced by me in open court on this the 8th day of October 2025) (DHANESH MUGALI) III ADDL.SMALL CAUSES JUDGE, MEMBER, MACT & ACJM, BENGALURU.
43 SCCH-18 MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023 ANNEXURE List of witnesses examined on petitioners' side:
PW1 Smt. Nethravathi PW2 Smt. Manjubhargavi M.G. PW3 Shri Kadiravan PW4 Shri Mahesha B. PW5 Dr.H.V.Satish Babu PW6 Dr.B.Manjunath PW7 Dr.Chidanand K.J.C.
List of documents exhibited on petitioners' side:
Ex.P1 FIR Ex.P2 FIS Ex.P3 FIR Ex.P4 Spot mahazar Ex.P5 Spot sketch Ex.P6 Inquest Ex.P7 Notice u/s 133 of MV Act Ex.P8 Reply to notice u/s 133 of MV Act Ex.P9 IMV report Ex.P10 Charge sheet Ex.P11 Inquest report Ex.P12 Cr.P.C. 161 statement Ex.P13 Wound certificate of petitioner in MVC 7152/2023 Ex.P14 (a) Discharge summaries to (c) Ex.P15 (a) OPD 44 SCCH-18
MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023 to (c) Ex.P16 Laboratory reports Ex.P17 Medical bills Ex.P18 Prescriptions Ex.P19 X-rays Ex.P20 to Photographs of petitioner in MVC Ex.P23 7152/2023 Ex.P24 C.D. Ex.P25 Wound certificate of petitioner in MVC 7725/2023 Ex.P26 (a) Discharge summaries to (f) Ex.P27(a) to OPD
(j) Ex.P28 Bronchoscopy report Ex.P29 Laboratory reports Ex.P30 ABJ reports Ex.P31 Medical bills Ex.P32 Prescriptions Ex.P33 X-rays Ex.P34 to Photographs of petitioner in MVC Ex.P43 7725/2023 Ex.P44 C.D. Ex.P45 Employment letter & salary certificate Ex.P46 to Aadhar cards Ex,.P51 Ex.P52 Authorisation letter Ex.P53 to Case sheets Ex.P55 Ex.P56 X-ray 45 SCCH-18 MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023 Ex.P57 Authorisation letter Ex.P58 Inpatient record of petitioner in MVC 7725/2023 Ex.P59 Authoriation letter Ex.P60 Case sheets of petitioner in MVC 7152/2023 Ex.P61 Authorisation letter Ex.P62 Case sheets of petitioner in MVC 7725/2023 Ex.P63 Outpatient record Ex.P64 Psychological assessment report Ex.P65 CT report Ex.P66 Electrco encephalogram Ex.P67 CT scan film Ex.P68 Police intimation Ex.P69 MLC extract Ex.P70 Outpatient record of petitioner in MVC 7152/2023 Ex.P71 X-ray of petitioner in MVC 7152/2023 Ex.P72 Out patient record of petitioner in MVC 7725/2023 Ex.P73 X-ray of petitioner in MVC 7725/2023 Ex.P74 Discharge summary Ex.P75 Outpatient record Ex.P76 Lab reports Ex.P77 Medical bills Ex.P78 Prescriptions 46 SCCH-18 MVC No.7151/2023, 7152/2023 & 7725/2023 List of witnesses examined on respondents' side:
Nil List of documents exhibited on respondents' side:
Nil (DHANESH MUGALI) III ADDL.SMALL CAUSES JUDGE, MEMBER, MACT & ACJM, BENGALURU.