High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri S Vasudevan vs M/S S R S Travels Rep By Its Prop on 29 May, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Sri S Vasudevan vs M/S S R S Travels Rep By Its Prop on 29 May, 2009
Author: Dr.K.Bhakthavatsala
M. EA No.1 1129/2005

IN THE HIGH COURT or KARNATAKA 
DATED THIS THE 2961 DAY OF     A'
BERQRE, \   2   4'

THE HON'BLE Dr. JUsT1€:1é;_  

MISCELL_ANEOUS F¥I4"ESV3' I "'2F§PPE§AL--_1\ia>. (MVP; T'
BETWEEN:  V   . 

SIi.S.Vasudevan,  - 1

Aged about 45 years,  V V
S/0.SI'i.P.R.Subba.Rao«,.:"
R/a.No.2£);A1V°*_'F1o€)_r,§  . "
Ka1ikamf:aTeinpEe'St:1*e¢t, _ « fa

      
   A_  
B:"mga1o3fi;_-560?-2 026;. § 2   .  v . ..APPELLANT

(By Si+i..§é.I§:ié.hfi.a.VReei.£1y 3.-,
' » S1i.C1urugop.inath, Advs.)

  'V  s; S;Ru;S.Trave1s,

 by its Pzopiictor,
 Rajashckar,
"No.32 1 / 3, T. S.P. Road,

" V Kaiasipalyam,

Bangalore-S60 002.

VV ' '  The New India Assurance Co.L1:d,,

No.40, Lakshmi Complex,

2*" Floor, K.R.Road, Fort,

Ba.ngalore--56{) 002,

Rep. by its Manager. ...RESPONDEN'I'S

(By Sri.D.S,S1'idhar, Adv. for R-2)



¥\3

M.F.A NQ11129/2005

This M.F.A. is filed 11/ s.173(1) of MV Act against the
Judgment an Award dt.22.'7.2005 passed in 
No.5323/2004 on the file of the IV Add}. Judge,  

Small Causes 8:; Member, MAUI', Metropolitan  A,=~eaj_
Bangalore (S(3CH--6) partly allowing the claim peftitiof1,L_for:__ 

compensation 85 seeking enhancement of compensatigzzt.' 4. 

This M.F.A. comm' g on for admission,.:   

Court delivered the following-

The appellant] claiment  --N._o.5('§23/20§()4 on
the file of Court of    M.A.C.'I' at
Bangalore city, :31 for enhanced
compensafic-xi;   'A t t  

2:.1oWit'h   the leaxned counsels for the

parties, heard'    disposal.

 V'  _ 5"3.:_L:eaz'.§1ed  for the appellant submits that the

  working as a Cash Collector for cable

cor:;;.teetio«1.1"Vt£i33tier S. Rajesh on a sala1y of Rs.3,8(¥0/-- per

",_n:1o11th,~.  Tfibunal has not awarded any commnsation

A X1' loss of earning during the period of treatment and

t  rest at least for a period of three months. He further



M.F*'.A No.11129/2005

subneits that the claimant had sustained 

plater fracture with laterial condyle fracture of  

the claimant was aged about 44 years and the  V

got disablement to the extent of    ._

lower Iimb and 10°/o to the 'V V

Tribunal has not awarded  vtowaixds loss
of earning capacity. V if as?  that the
claimant has stated  b.§:§5j;~¢V."  that as the
claimant     hence, he left the
job.  awarded towards pain and
sufiefinfi    is on the lower side and no

coe1pensa'eioh"' .. heen awarded towards attendant

    Therefore, he submits that the impugned

I   may be modified and additional

 may be awarded,

2 ~   4." Learned counsel for Respondent No.2/Insurance

tfotzdpany submits that the Tribunal has awarded

V’ Eeasonabxe compensation of Rs.S5,000/– with interest and

the same has been deposited and isaid to the

Le

M.P’.A N¢4..1Vi»1¢9;2oe5

appellant] claimant and there is no

enhancement of compensation; «

5. It is pertinent to -1_;.1cx3.fi”c;:(t”it§1:V-at htgts
awarded compensation in pf as under:
$ _ ._ ‘ ks-

Pain and 25,ooo~oo
Med§ie:fi::t!%xpe¥:se:3t ~ 5,ooo~oo
% 1o,0oo~o

“”” ~é;Ed.:’:1ou1§VSIiii1cnt
‘ cf-:xpc11*scs_ ‘o

Total Rs.55,000~(}0

éktxtxittedly, the Tribunal has not taken into

‘j_tI1’c salary of the claimant and no compensation

Itas awarded towards loss of eaxnjng during the period

At fiiatxnent and rest. Keeping in View the nature of

ifit1j11I’i€S sustained and fieatntzent taken by the claitaazlt, he

could not have done anything for a pcziod of three: months.

Therefore, the claimant was entitled for compensation

L_t

M.F’.A N0, 11129/2005

towards loss of earning during the period of

rest for three months. The emplayer of the

examined. The claimant has pleaded» gehfiai-._

Rs.3,800/- per zzaonth. In

satisfactory evidence, earnm Vgeiéjf ._tl1e f 4Be”SVe.fe1y ‘V

fixed at Rs.3,000[ ~ p.133…” isventistled for a
sum of Rs.9,000/- _ téeernjng during the
period of treatment ‘ Oificer has
deposed to the extent
of to :iower”li:a1b. In my View permanent
éisabhteeetot be safely fixed at 10%; of

the jévhele V_ ‘I’i’:1e was 44 years. In View of the

by the H0n’b1e Apex Court in Civil Appeal

1 .tt3″O,_348i§’i«200[8v.*:”on 15.04.2009 (SARALA VARMA AND

(3’1’HEI2_E3′ .,§’/s.DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATEON AND

ifiis a fit case to apply multiplier 14 and award

eatxtgiensafion towards loss of future caxnings. Thus, the

is entitled for cozzepensation of R’s.50,400[-

(Rs.3,w€)/~ x 10% X 12 x 14) towamds loss of earning

capacity. As no compensation is awarded towards

L_/H

M.F’.A No.11129/2005

attendant charges, it would meet the ends _c;f”~f:p

awani a sum of Rs,1,00€)/-

Compensation awarded by thgz’ ‘

heads does not call for enhancexaiépi — A
‘7. Thus, the cla1ma’ D’V’VL’:ktVVV’ T for ‘vfiaddifionai
compensation as ‘A ‘ L H H

Loss d:11:ii1g”t}§:é L
Qf ‘rest .

(Rs;.3,(;foQ/-xaggjjg. é’ 9,000-00

(R;s.~3,OOI3’i-: x ;(29g;;’;:__12-x 14) 50,4o0~oo

Azt§nd§n=t J 1900-00

3 claimant is entitled for additional

éompgnaétién of Rs.60,400/ –.

AA in the result, the appeal is partly alkswed hoiding

the appeilantj ciaimani is entitled for aciditioznal

L

M.F.A No.11129/2005
compensation of Rs.60,400/ – along with interest a1 t’ac rate

of 6% p.a., from the date of petition till ~

The Respondent No.2]II1sura.nce

to deposit the award amount 1

months from today.

The Tribunal is at t9 order