Sri Madesh vs The Managing Director Ksrtc on 1 October, 2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 18'? DAY OF OCTOBER, 20,1._,o] j ~ N

PRESENT

THE HONBLE MR. .JUs'1'1c;?E PA'rr:L[_f -   _ 

AND 
THE HONBLE MR.JUsTi(:v§j  

M.F.A.NO*.V.583'1/$2.00'6 fifvfV},, M

BETWEEN:

sR1.MADEsI~1'  
S/O.VEERACHAR1i:¢.V

AGE: 35«YEA--RS;.  , 
R/0.N0,161,_ 2'fiD1'.c_Ross.,'¥  _
NEAR MASZED,' COO'LIE.N)»1§}P;R, '
1\%'ANDINI1;AY'QU'1',V.V_ '   
BANGALOR1:__- 2.9 .  "   APPELLANT

~ . '_ (BY SM'1f.B.H.SIjNIV  FOR
 .V "sRI'.'SURESHi\/I LATUR - ADV.)

- THE MANAGiNG DIRECTOR.
 V'~K.S.R.T.C.7~DEPARTMENT,
 - <,SHANTHI"NAGAR, DOUBLE ROAD,
 'BANGALORE -- 27. ...RESPONDENT

[BY sR1.M_s.NARAYAN — ADV.)

%

;*WM_wM_Wm4

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1)
ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED

20.10.2005 PASSED IN MVC NO.6105/2003 ON
01+’ THE VE ADDL. so), MEMBER MACT, METRQPOL£TAN;_.
AREA, BANGALORE . (SCCH-2}, PARTLY ALLo*-AIINo.o_THEd.””-A ‘
CLAIM PETETION FOR COMPENSATKON ANL1,.__”s3EE;:INo-
ENHANCEMENT OF’ COMPENSATIOIVHWITH 1:’;/o_,iNTEREsf:.

THIS APPEAL COMING ON Eoii

N.K.PATIL J ., DELIVERED THE..FOLLQWING:f:””
This appeal by against the
impugned judgifiieht 20. 10.2005,
passed in file of the VI
Additional..Jtid§e;:’E«;t1d Claims Tribunal.
Banga1o1″e,’–” ‘A short, Tribunal’) for

enhanoemuentd of Veoiiiperlisation on the ground that the

,_Ve0mp3’er1sati.on o’i”Rs_,_53,000/– awarded in favour of the

against his claim for Rs.4,00,000/–, is

iria I _

A 2.””.. The brief facts of the case are that the

.’ appellant claims to be a Coolie by profession, aged about

years as on the date of accident and earning a sum

‘1;

part, awarding a sum of Rs.53,000/ — with interest atr–‘”F9/o

p.a. from the date of petition till the date of 3

Being dissatisfied with the quantum of ”

awarded by the Tribunal, the afifieliarit “ifs, ~:

before this Court, see,ki_i_1g “‘-erihaneei7?;ieiit” it

compensation.

4. We have heard for appellant
and iearned eouiasei,for:responderit–<.Corporation.

5. ____ of the impugned

judgmeiit a.11d.tVVVawla1jéfi’iaridfafter.’ critical evaluation of the

original records file, What emerges is that,

the ,,r:_orhpensatioh: vdawviarded by the Tribunal towards

Hfpain _ a.11d..agoI1y, medical expenses and loss of future

income’ “is”.”_j-ust”‘Vand reasonable and does not call for

‘ V interfere”naceV.”

” — _ However, the compensation towards

cohveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges

%;M

2′

{i

and loss of income during laid up period is on the lower

side.

‘7. It is not in dispute that the “‘

undergone treatment for 12 days

During that period, he would:”have”‘
amount towards conveyance’;’uV:..noti’rishing’«food and
attendant charges. /~ p.rn.

assessed by side. The
accident Therefore, we
safely avssess:tlf1.e /~ p.m. Taking into
consideration’ sf. injuries sustained, the

doctor. has ass_esse,d disability at 8% in respect of whole

ll ?-.'”He”- .rnight”‘”haVe taken bed rest and follow–up

1 t.reatr1ne,_r:1t._A injuries sustained in the accident on

the =advi_c:e the doctor, therefore, we can safely assess

u””‘-“thepptreatrnent period as three months instead of two

ahanlonths as taken by the Tribunal.

as

_ of justice’;

8. Further, the Tribunal has not awardedany

compensation towards ‘loss of amenities, discorn.fo’rt:and”” V.

unhappiness’. The Tribunal ought to

some compensation towards the

consideration the unhappiness. and discomfort3 he has} to

suffer through out his life duelt’o._ltl1eV
all these factors into’ deaf; fit to
award Rs.20,000_/– as» towards
‘coriveyanee, ‘latte-ndant charges,
loss of unhappiness’ and
loss of upfperiod’ in addition to the

compensation aw’a_rded»- Tribunal to meet the ends

it light of the facts and circumstances of

the ‘–case,’ ‘I-Ii-‘”:.l’.»’stated above, the appeal filed by appellant

allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award

i._lldatec’l*’l 20.10.2005, passed in MVC 1\:o.0i05/2003, on

~tl’-lie file of the VI Additional Judge and Motor Accidents

0%/is

/
r

Claims Tribunal. Bangalore, (SCCH-2) is hereby

modified, awarding another sum of Rs.20,(}Qt)

addition to the compensation awarded by

with interest at 6% per annum from jdate’T_

till the date of realization.

The Corporation” ,_is’ lldepossflit the
enhanced compensation “of. with interest
thereon at 6% per annui’-mifwithin from the

date of receipt%__ot of award.

On Cvorporation, the entire
sum s11all_ _ favour of the appellant,

immediately:

to dtaw—award. accordingly.

Sdisig
Fudge

Sdle.§___
Iuclge

e “TL