SRI. C.C. NACHAPPA v. MR. A.D. AJITH

(BY SRI. H.S.LINGARAJ, ADVOCATE FOR R2; VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 19.11.2025, NOTICE TO R1, R3 AND R4 IS DISPENSED WITH) …RESPONDENTS THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 11.08.2022 PASSED IN MVC NO. 160/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, KODAGU-MADIKERI, SITTING AT VIRAJPET, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA ORAL JUDGMENT Heard Sri.Bhanu Prakash H V, learned counsel for the appellant as well as Sri.H S Lingaraj, learned counsel for respondent No.2.

2. This appeal is the outcome of the award that is passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Virajpet in MVC No.160/2019 dated 11.08.2022. This is a claimant's appeal. - 3 - NC: 2026:KHC:5296 MFA No. 7711 of 2023 HC-KAR

3. On the ground that he sustained grievous injuries in a road traffic accident that occurred in the year 2019, appellant filed a petition claiming compensation. The Tribunal through the impugned order held that the appellant is entitled to a sum of Rs.10,93,014/- as compensation. The version of the appellant is that he is entitled to a higher sum.

4. Making his submission in respect of merits of the matter, learned counsel for the appellant contends that the appellant was a student as on the date of accident and he was studying 2nd year B.Com. The injuries sustained left him with disability of 100% in respect of whole body. However, the Tribunal took the disability in respect of whole body as 30%, which is unjustifiable. Learned counsel further states that the appellant lost his marriage prospects as well as his livelihood. Learned counsel also states that in case the appellant had completed his B.Com. decree and pursued further studies, he would have earned a lot. But, the Tribunal took the - 4 - NC: 2026:KHC:5296 MFA No. 7711 of 2023 HC-KAR notional income of the appellant as Rs.10,000/-. Learned counsel submits that for assessment of compensation for the relevant period i.e., for the year 2019, the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority is taking the notional income as Rs.14,000/- per month and at least said figure should be considered.

5. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 submits that the assessment of disability by the Tribunal is proper. Learned counsel also states that on taking the notional income of Rs.14,000/- per month, there may be marginal enhancement.

6. By all the evidence produced, appellant succeeded in establishing that he sustained Right C5-T1 Pan Brachial Plexus injury, abrasions over right knee, right wrist and left eyebrow. Also by the evidence produced, it is clear that the appellant took extensive treatment for the injuries sustained, which includes the Right Radial Grafting. - 5 - NC: 2026:KHC:5296 MFA No. 7711 of 2023 HC-KAR

7. Considering the submission that is made by learned counsel for the appellant, this Court is of the view that the notional income of the appellant is required to be taken as Rs.14,000/- per month. Though learned counsel for the appellant seeks to consider the disability of the appellant in respect of whole body as 100%, having considered the evidence produced, which includes Ex.P.16 - disability certificate and the evidence of CW.1, this Court is of the view that the disability with respect of whole body as assessed by the Tribunal i.e., 30% is proper. Therefore, taking the notional income of the appellant as Rs.14,000/- per month and without disturbing other parameters i.e., application of appropriate multiplier '18' and the disability in respect of whole body as 30%, the compensation which the appellant is entitled to receive towards loss of future earnings is Rs.9,07,200/- (Rs.14,000/- X 12 X 18 X 30%). Also this Court is of the view that appellant is entitled to a sum of Rs.25,000/- for the food, extra nourishment, attendant and conveyance charges. Further the appellant - 6 - NC: 2026:KHC:5296 MFA No. 7711 of 2023 HC-KAR is entitled to a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards loss of amenities, which includes loss of marriage prospects. Thus, the total compensation which the appellant is entitled to receive under each head is as under: Sl.No. Heads Compensation for pain and suffering Medical expenses Towards nourishment, attendant and conveyance charges food, Amount (Rs.) 80,000.00 3,55,014.00 25,000.00 Loss of future earnings Loss of amenities Total 9,07,200.00 50,000.00 14,17,214.00

4. 5.

8. The Tribunal through the impugned order held that appellant is entitled to a sum of Rs.10,93,014/- as compensation. However, the discussion that went on supra makes it clear that the appellant is entitled to a sum of Rs.14,17,214/- as compensation. Therefore, the appeal is disposed of with the following: ORDER i. The appeal is allowed in part. - 7 - NC: 2026:KHC:5296 MFA No. 7711 of 2023 HC-KAR ii. The compensation that is granted by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Virajpet through orders in MVC No.160/2019 dated 11.08.2022 enhanced Rs.10,93,014/- Rs.14,17,214/-. iii. The enhanced sum shall carry interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of deposit except for the period of delay of 351 days as per orders on I.A.No.1/2023. iv. Respondent No.2 is directed to deposit the enhanced sum within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this Judgment. v. On such deposit, appellant is permitted to withdraw the entire amount. Sd/- (DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE GSR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 28