IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.101918 OF 2023 (MV-I)

BETWEEN:

THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, DIVISIONAL OFFICE, NK COMPLEX, KESHWAPUR, HUBBALLI, REP. BY ITS REGIONAL OFFICE, TP-HUB, SUMANGALA COMPLEX, 2^ND FLOOR, LAMINGTON ROAD, HUBBALLI, …PETITIONER (BY SRI. N.R. KUPPELUR, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. RAGHAVENDRA S/O. ISHWARAPPA KADAM, AGED. 21 YEARS, OCC. TILES FITTING WORKS, R/O. RAJ NAGAR, SHIVALLI PLOT, DHARWAD, NOW R/O. AKKIALUR, TQ. HANGAL, DIST. HAVERI-581113. 2. SAYAD S/O. DAVALSAB ATTAR, Digitally signed AGED. 33 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, by YASHAVANT R/O. AZAD NAGAR, MALAPUR ROAD, NARAYANKAR DHARWAD-580021, Location: HIGH (OWNER OF THE MOTOR CYCLE COURT OF KARNATAKA BEARING NO.KA25/EZ7543)

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. HARISH S.MAIGUR, ADVOCATE FOR R1;

SRI. M.L. VANTI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION

173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLE ACT, 1988, PRAYING TO MODIFY THE AWARD DATED 11.01.2023 TO REDUCE THE COMPENSATION, PASSED IN MVC NO.90/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS AND ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, HANGAL AND ETC.,.

THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL JUDGMENT Aggrieved by the award passed in MVC No.90/2021 dated

11.01.2023 by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hangal (for short ‘the Tribunal’) the insurance company is in appeal questioning the quantum of compensation. The Tribunal has awarded the compensation as per the table given below:

2. The learned counsel appearing for the insurance company submits that when it is the evidence of the doctor that the petitioner/claimant has suffered 45% disability to the lower limb and 20% disability to the upper limb and 1/3^rd of 45% disability to the upper limb comes to 15%, and 1/4^th of 20% disability to the lower limb comes to 5%, altogether the disability has to be considered as 20% to the whole body. It is submitted that the Tribunal has considered future prospects for the disability of 20% and the claimant is not entitled for future prospects. Further, it is submitted that under other heads also the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the higher side. Further, it is submitted that the interest was taken at 9% per annum instead of 6% per annum.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/

claimant submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is in fact on the lower side. The Tribunal has granted loss of income during the laid up period only for two months. Further, considering the injuries sustained by the claimant and also the fact that future medical expenses are also required, the Tribunal ought to have granted the compensation under the head of future medical expenses. It is submitted that the petitioner is entitled for more compensation insofar as pain and suffering, medical expenses, conveyance, loss of amenities is concerned.

4. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the material on record.

5. The compensation awarded for pain and sufferings, medical expenses, conveyance, food and nourishment, attendant charges is concerned, the Tribunal has rightly granted the compensation amount and this Court is not inclined to go into those aspects.

6. When it comes to the loss of future earnings, as the accident had occurred in the year 2020. The income taken by the Tribunal at Rs.13,750/- per month is correct. Coming to the disability, as rightly argued by the learned counsel for the appellant, the disability has to be taken at 20% instead of 30% taken by the Tribunal. Considering the disability of 20%, the claimant is entitled for future prospects at 40% i.e. Rs.5,500/-. Accordingly, the monthly income after adding future prospects, comes to Rs.19,250/- and therefore, under the head of loss of future earnin