✦ Karnataka High Court · 23 Feb 2026

LAKSHMAN v. MANJUNATH C

Case Details Karnataka High Court · 23 Feb 2026
Court
Karnataka High Court
Decided
23 Feb 2026
Length
1,368 words

Summary

A structured summary for this judgment hasn’t been prepared yet. The full text is below.

Precedent status

No treatment data yet for this judgment in the Courts & Cases corpus.

Absence of data is not a statement about the judgment’s standing — the corpus covers only judgments we index and link with cited evidence.

Why is this linked?

Original judgment text

(BY SRI.JANARDHAN REDDY., ADVOCATE FOR R2) (V/O DATED 13.02.2026 NOTICE TO R1 IS D/W) …RESPONDENTS THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 03.11.2023 PASSED IN MVC NO. 1390/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE VIII ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE, ACMM, MEMBER, MACT, BENGALURU (SCCH-5) PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION OF COMPENSATION. ENHANCEMENT SEEKING AND IN MFA NO. 114/2024 BETWEEN:

1. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD., 144, 2ND FLOOR SUBHARAM COMPLEX M.G. ROAD, BANGLAORE 560 001 REP BY ITS MANAGER (BY SRI. JANARDHAN REDDY.,ADVOCATE) AND: ...APPELLANT - 3 - NC: 2026:KHC:11459 MFA No. 3180 of 2024 C/W MFA No. 114 of 2024 HC-KAR

1. SRI LAKSHMAN S/O RAMANANDA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/AT GHURAPALLI SANT KABIR NAGAR UTTAR PRADESH 272 271

2. SRI. MANJUNATH .C S/O D. CHANNAGE GWOA MAJOR IN AGE R/AT NO.6 1ST MAIN 4TH CROSS UAS LAYOUT NEAR NTI BUS STOP BANGALORE 560 094 (OWNER OF THE CAR NO.KA-03-MB-8979) ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RANGEGOWDA N R.,ADVOCATE FOR R1) (V/O DATED NOTICE TO R2 IS D/W) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 03.11.2023 PASSED IN MVC NO.1390/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE VIII ADDITIONAL SCJ AND ACMM, MEMBER, MACT, BENGALURU, SCCH-5. AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.7,48,882/- WITH INTEREST AT 6 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION. 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:11459 MFA No. 3180 of 2024 C/W MFA No. 114 of 2024 HC-KAR ORAL JUDGMENT Heard the arguments of both sides.

2. MFA.No.3180/2024 is filed by the appellant- claimant against the judgment and the award of the tribunal passed in MVC.No.1390/2022 dated 03.11.2023 by the VIII Additional Small Causes Judge and ACMM, Member- MACT, Bengaluru.

3. Injured - claimant met with an accident on

12.10.2021 and filed claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.25,00,000/-. The tribunal considering the entire evidence on record granted Rs.7,48,882/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation.

4. Aggrieved by the said judgment and award, the injured - claimant filed MFA.No.3180/2024 and contended that the amount granted by the tribunal is inadequate. The doctor assessed the disability as 46% to the left lower limb - 5 - NC: 2026:KHC:11459 MFA No. 3180 of 2024 C/W MFA No. 114 of 2024 HC-KAR and 23% to the whole body. But the tribunal erred in taking the same as 20%, and the interest is to be granted at the rate of 9%. Amounts granted under the other heads are meager, and thus requested for enhancement of the compensation.

5. The Insurance company MFA.No.114/2024 disputing the quantum, and they mainly contended that the notional income is to be taken as Rs.15,000/-. But the tribunal erred in taking the same as Rs.15,744/- and the disability is to be taken as 15% but the tribunal excessively took it as 20% and the liability is fixed on them without looking into ExP18-MLC and thus requested for modification of the order.

6. It is stated that the petitioner/appellant was aged 38 years, working as a carpenter and earning Rs.20,000/- per month, but he has not filed any income proof. The tribunal observed that he was a skilled labour and took his wages as Rs.15,744/- as per the Minimum Wages Act as it is a beneficial legislation, whichever - 6 - NC: 2026:KHC:11459 MFA No. 3180 of 2024 C/W MFA No. 114 of 2024 HC-KAR beneficial to the litigant is to be taken. Admittedly, he has not filed any income proof. Whenever there is no income proof this Court is relying upon the chart and taking notional income for the purpose of calculation. As the accident occurred in the year 2021 and as there is no income proof, this Court finds it reasonable to take his notional income as Rs.15,000/- per month and he was aged 38 years as per Ex.P15 and the multiplier applicable is '15'.

7. Petitioner sustained a left III B open fracture both bones leg, left 1st, 2nd metatarsal fracture, for which he underwent for wound debridement, external fixation of tibia, K-wire fixation for metatarsal fracture as per Ex.P6 wound certificate.

8. Appellant/claimant also examined PW4- doctor and issued a disability certificate, in which the doctor assessed the physical disability of 46% in the left lower limb and 23% to the whole body and it is further observed that fractures are not united and thus the tribunal has - 7 - NC: 2026:KHC:11459 MFA No. 3180 of 2024 C/W MFA No. 114 of 2024 HC-KAR considered the whole body disability as 20%. But, 1/3rd of 46% comes to 15%. Therefore, this Court finds it reasonable to modify the disability as 15%. Loss of future earning capacity comes to Rs.15,000/- x12x15x15% = Rs.4,05,000/-.

9. The tribunal granted Rs.1,21,354/- towards medical expenses as per the relevant bills and it is confirmed that he was in the hospital for a period of 13 days. Considering the nature of injuries, malunion of the fractures and other relevant factors, this Court finds it reasonable to grant an amount of Rs.60,000/- for pain and sufferings, Rs.30,000/- loss of amenities and Rs.40,000/- for transportation, extra nourishment and attending charges. The petitioner might not have done any other work at least for a period of 4 months. Therefore, Rs.60,000/- is to be granted under the head loss of income during the laid up period. - 8 - NC: 2026:KHC:11459 MFA No. 3180 of 2024 C/W MFA No. 114 of 2024 HC-KAR

10. The total compensation comes to Rs.4,05,000/- +Rs.1,21,354/- + Rs.60,000/-+ Rs.30,000/- + Rs.40,000/- + Rs.60,000/- = Rs.7,16,354/-.

11. Thus, in all, the claimant is entitled for the following compensation: SL.NO. PARTICULARS AMOUNT (IN.RS.)

5. Loss of capacity future earning 4,05,000.00 Medical expenses 1,21,354.00 Pain and sufferings Loss of amenities Transportation, nourishment and attendant charges 60,000.00 30,000.00 40,000.00 Loss of income during laid up period 60,000.00 TOTAL 7,16,354.00

12. The Tribunal has awarded the compensation of Rs.7,48,882/- but the appellant/claimant is entitled to reduced compensation Rs.7,16,354/-. - 9 - NC: 2026:KHC:11459 MFA No. 3180 of 2024 C/W MFA No. 114 of 2024 HC-KAR Compensation reduced from Rs.7,48,882/- Rs.7,16,354/-.

13. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i. The appeal filed by the Insurance Company in MFA.No.114/2024 allowed MFA.No.3180/2024 filed by the appellant/claimant is hereby dismissed. ii. The judgment and award passed by the Tribunal dated 03.11.2023 in MVC.No.1390/2022 by the VIII Additional Small Causes Judge and ACMM, Member- MACT, Bengaluru is hereby modified holding that the claimant is entitled total compensation of Rs.7,16,354/- along with interest @ 6% p.a. iii. Insurance company already deposited the 50% award amount before the tribunal. Therefore, the Insurance Company is directed to deposit balance compensation amount with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. within 1 month from the date of this order. - 10 - NC: 2026:KHC:11459 MFA No. 3180 of 2024 C/W MFA No. 114 of 2024 HC-KAR iv. On such deposit, appellant/claimant is permitted to withdraw the entire amount along with interest on the said amount. Sd/- (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE RCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 63

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Karnataka High Court or eCourts case status. ← Search more judgments