-1- IN THE man comer or % DATED THIS THE 2-ad DMQF BEFORE * O 1.
.-*.:<:<.n.:~.I:~:.¢s.OO O = '
s/o LATE K_EM~-A_!Aii_V—..__."~~.V _ ._
AGED ABCJU'T:'fii YEARS' .. "
R 1 Q B-ISILENAI EALLI, AMF.A*FH.L3'R HOBLI
KUENIGAL *mLu1:,11J'MKUR DIs'rRwr
APPELLANT
.._-_ -_.__"–.
A ” “1. u”‘4..;}.*i?§}\’!:’VH{.BHA
«MAJOR BY AGE
_ N’oi_:zo_. MOODLAGIRI NWASA
arm MAIN, BYRASANDRA EAST
~ 55$ BLOCK, -JAYANAC-.A..F!.A.
BANGALORE-1 1
O ‘ ‘ THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
NO 3, iS’T’ FLOOR.
KHENI BUILDING
ISI’ CROSS, GANDHINAGARA
BANGALORE
BY ITS MANAGER
‘*”‘”Sr’:S~
_.>
.>
I
-<2
:13
:3:
‘:3
no
‘i’HiS MFA men we we (1) eFt:.9Ji
TH-E JUDGMENT AND AWARDDATED: ~t411._,2.:*acs:’.r5 Passan ; ‘e
m MVQNO. 3369i:200:?. ON F’iLi3 toe ,:c:’\ms
ADDLJUDGE &. MAC!’-IV, BANGALOREQ ~tSCeaf~.«1s1e;t4),
PARTLY ALLOWING me Guam e;;”E*I”£’.l’VI’l0N”; FOR,
cempenemon AND SEEKING” ._EN.HANC=Eiv§EN1′ 0::-*
eompeusmon wrm INTEREST, t
THIS MFA cciM1Nefei§LVt r9t;R%’%t*’tHEARVifidt THIS DAY,
HHE C-GURT MKDE
The by the Judgment
and” am-.da%11t.2§2co5atm MVC 3309/02 of the
Me; ,1′ ‘._!’.riLn.ma1-N, B-a11.ga1ere city, (for
A4-ua-unA >-:
short as preferred appeai fer-
. cf «compensation.
the accident that occurred i4.6.”2m2′
a motor vehicle, the appellant claiming to have
at : crush injury of the right foot, loss of skin and
eirpoeure ef the metatarsal bone, treated at the Sanjay
Gandhi Haspi and R h T s._l….I.* -I &flm’m’Ei
.3-
diagnosed as fracture of the metatarsal 2%”, 5th. 4′
of the right foot, underwent 2 ; .0
right the fractures, filed’ a
lak…-5 as cemgmnsatien of die’
Motor Vehicies having
adjudicated the ggddmble neghgen’ cc
to the ‘ddijgotgrdfiirellicle and awarded
the follciwiizg V
E.
i
2
2
5
;_
5
L
3″
3.
£2
— . conveyance
_._ attei1daI_fl;chaI’ges : 5,000 _l —
“.1 than -:1-no-|r\-rrnn 1-III-II}-I-‘:1: 111-311 nm
IJKIBCF ‘I “Lu” 1u.II.l. ‘ll.-I
….. .. 0 : 5,000/-
0 — Adi amenities of life : 10,0001-
nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn qua
I-of-:5] I Dc .4 R M”
L’.-I ‘£1 u .I’\\’-39 ‘1’ LI LI
——————————– —
3. Ha@ heard the learned counsel for the
and documentary, undoubted1y_,_in the’ ‘i
occurred on 14.6.2002, the
of the metatarsal 2″”, SW ‘of.
in the appellant
while as an i11patient__*in* Hotpital frnni
14.6.02 to intervention for
W39 0*? ulfilmllactme. Ex.P8, the
t ‘the sheet records the
*..;.-.r 11_1mt_g .pt billing . r r m .
(U.
IAIKJCEI.’ \J11I..- Luv (.51 13:1. I..La;_aI.au..-_ aria w a .4»…-
for Rs;6_.594/’~._ anti… income of the clann’ ‘ ant as
hp”.m.–««~«h1 addition the bills Ex.P7 series is for
V medicines for Rs.2, 175/-.
.4; ‘T111 the backdrop of these facts, it cannot but be
* s that the appellant underwent an ordeal and mental
distress due to the pain and sufi’e1’ing. The appellant
was m iI’r”‘tient for more than twc mm he
treatment. In that view of the matter, it was not
no
«U \
– b –
a”‘|!I’\, ‘I… _ _ _ _ _ _-_.._..’l__’I
reasonabie ft)? “1? Mfibl it Have aweuumi RS.3-u_,m:uf-
as compensation for pain, sufiering
enhancing the same to R’s.30,000/- is just:
5. The MACT fell in ii
series, the bills for p1u’ct:a$i=*=..’1f :R!s,9i3,
as also the inpatient bill E’.-a11j_ay for
Rs.5,594,’=. The m Rs.a,759,I-
rounded off its awarded.
6;’ “‘=’°” mp-atimt fcr 75 days
must have had the
assistaflce ‘ and hence entitled to
attendant charges. Keeping in mind
., cf and treatment, the appellant is
_; u’1u.._1″ _:.~ .. E 1 .. ‘
*u’L’ii’.it::1i_ R:s.u,mG;– is fc-flu, nuaiam,
“‘eonveyair’1ce charges.
‘7 1’4–S.._
I-l.I…l
5
L
5′
5″
+
.5
Ir
1″
3
-r
3.
3′
ntflrlnrnrln n’. U 2
171 uuliut. uut. uu-.I.L lu me uvxuuuuu Us 4 n=
Drfshivakumar Y.S., Orthopedic surgeon, who treated
.\…I
U”\
-6-
the appellant for the crush of _t:t;1(‘:’4’i’*:””ifl;
opined that the appellant enjiferfed
physical disability of 42% tolmelxaghtatiotvgr @d l
2 1% in relation to the whole”
.n’e -1’
-ray di–…,J.oee»:! ‘union of..t1’I.e.’§f:’ae
,L_,
the 213*’ metatarsal was
non-urlitetilgmd 7 5th toes were
disaxfieultétece witness is not in the
ll perman_ ent impairment
us-1%; ‘4’*”*’r_’ meaetee-meet of ..me…on..2-.1 H-..t.nmIn..e..t ..ut
appea.t’S*«..tov opinion. i say so because
V-litiewesment ztneasurement should be made when
condition has reached the stage of
improvement from the medical treatment.
111 V npuu
r1-\1¢..’:._……:………….. .. *
cut of the enfi exeezmty depend um-We
v combmatzion of functional ent of mobility
component range of movement, abduction, flexion,
extension, evaluation of muscle etnength, stability
….-..po___.:r;t, _.u., A perusal of the evidence of HIV-2
Lek’
-7-
the opinion over the percentage of
does not inspire confidence i;*1″”theé ” ]_t1 1Ve j x
This is the reason why the
mmmmnywsmnucn for l of .,:’.:m ea}:-09.33: 11:13
does not mean to not suffer
from permanent ‘Giving mom for
exaggeratifrmgjjw the the appellant a
coolie _ feet to calm ‘rag on his
.. .° ……. 1…… .. ..
in v_ -uuuuu wuuifin u Vt: tu lldtu
as
:1!
diseozeifoft, and frustration, and having
“V38 years on the date of accident
iIi.iU1′}’. “if’ is reasonable to enhance the
for loss of amenities of life fiom
W””Eu1e1 ii
.. . Atari .. n- nn 1
21:5. 1351553; – to I\b’.£U,UUU[ -.
_ __ 3…… _
Rs.5,000/- towards loss’ of income during laid off
peliod. Ex.P8 discloses that the monthly income of tl%e
ifijurfid W1: Rs.2,m;u;’- auu u u. 56 rec’-k_fii_1ex’}” i-tlfir,
period 011′. duty for atleast 4 ;u:3I_1_t:’I’1s,_-‘ tlie .
entitled to Rs.8,000/~ as .
the MACT.
.11 H19 – I he ;:=.g;I1iir1..;1–.. .1 a_wa_rd
us-|\4 nuzurs.-.nu.-, _.-A.– ., gs _
stands modified to thr: ff)i}uW1I1″”‘”§
compensation} _
Pafin’ T T. % A : Rs.30.000/-
Attefi§vi»a’iL~t:-~– % % : 7,500/-
: 5,000] –
_I___._’._.
inséaf income um 3′ miu
————————– —
—–u—–u—————s
‘I1
The appcai is acconiingiy auowcd. _
Ln. gd [_