IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 6664 OF 2025 (MV-I)

BETWEEN:

GAUTHAM B, S/O S. BHAGAVAN, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, R/AT NO.394, 8TH CROSS, SWARNASANDRA, MANDYA CITY - 571 403.

…APPELLANT (BY SRI. SREENIVASAN M Y., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. PRIME MOVER MOBILITY TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED, NO.50/1, BESIDE MANTRI, Digitally signed ESPANA DEVARABISANAHALLI, by BENGALURU - 560 103.

PADMASH REE SHEKHAR

2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, DESAI RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., Location: High

1ST FLOOR, MYSORE TRADE CENTRE, Court of Karnataka OPP TO KSRTC BUS STAND, MYSORE - 570 001.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B. C. SHIVANNE GOWDA., ADVOCATE FOR R2;

V/O/D 10.09.2025, NOTICE TO R1 IS D/W)

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S. 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT. 31.01.2024 PASSED IN MVC NO.1638/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MEMBER MACT, MANDYA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA

ORAL JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the appellant/claimant under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 challenging the judgment and award dated 31.01.2024 passed in MVC No.1638/2020 on the file of the II Additional Senior Civil Judge and Member, MACT, Mandya, for enhancing the compensation.

2. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for respondent No.2/Insurance Company. The ranks of the parties are retained as per Tribunal for the sake of convenience.

3. The petitioner/injured claimant met with an accident on 21.10.2020 and filed petition before the Tribunal for compensation of Rs.40,00,000/-. The Tribunal considering the entire evidence on record granted an amount of Rs.9,63,800/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a., from the date of filing the petition till the date of deposit. Being aggrieved by the said order, this appeal is filed and mainly contended that Ex.P.5 is the wound certificate, which shows that the petitioner/injured sustained grievous injuries. The doctor who treated the petitioner has been examined as CW.1 and Ex.C.14 is the disability certificate, wherein the doctor assessed the disability at 36% to the right knee and 18% to the right elbow. But the Tribunal has taken the disability only at 12%, which is on the lower side. The petitioner/injured was studying 4th year Engineering at the time of the accident. But the Tribunal considered his notional income at Rs.10,000/- per month. In fact, he was studying B.E., 7th Semester at the time of the accident and had backlogs due to the accident. But no amount has been granted under the head loss of education. It is further contended that the petitioner requires another surgery, which would cost Rs.1,05,000/-. But the Tribunal has awarded only Rs.15,000/- under the future medical expenses. The Tribunal has granted meager amounts under other heads. Therefore, requested for enhancement of the compensation.

4. The petitioner/injured was aged 21 years and was studying 4th year Engineering at Ghousia Engineering College, Ramanagar, at the time of the accident. As he has not produced any proof of income and the accident occurred in the year 2020, his notional income is taken at Rs.14,500/- per month, as per the chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. The petitioner/injured was aged 21 years and therefore, the applicable multiplier is ‘18’. The doctor-CW.1 stated that the petitioner/injured had sustained fracture of the right femur and right elbow LCL ligament avulsion fracture and he had undergone surgery. The doctor assessed the disability at 36% to the right lower limb and 18% to the right upper limb. The total disability thus comes to 54% and 1/3^rd of the same comes to 18% to the whole body. But the Tribunal has taken the disability at 12% w