High Court Karnataka High Court

Chinnappa vs Divisional Controller Ksrtc on 19 January, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Chinnappa vs Divisional Controller Ksrtc on 19 January, 2010
Author: Manjula Chellur Gowda
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BA_[\i_:G'ALC;~é§E;:  _

DATED THIS THE 19*" DAY OF JANUAR\4,.:':;*.d1*£i  1'  

EREsENj,fj0

THEEKMWELErwRsJLEn:cE:wANflAJ\cHE;L0R_f

AMTA

?HEHoNBu3MRJ0$HCEA¢LvadKxwAuxGowDA

BETWEEN:

Sri. Chinna:p'p3,«.__  A A
S/0. Late Ye_Jla--p_p;a, V' _
Aged abo--u.t_ S'5_yea;+s,  ._
R/at. [,3:guvamf<:.ndIi':aE .4  ,.
MLmgan_ah--.aH: .I-§o'1';'fi'a._ *   -.
ChH¢ahanrTaukLL7."g"%"
KolarDIst'r!_ct;AV "  = 

(By?$3:9fét;.Sugu"ra-a_VVi§V.Reddy, Adv.)

wee;

'onngonafsonfiohen

%<.S».R.T.Cf',Ti,_ <
Koiazr DI..'g/Jsiofl,

'v_KoEar. .. 

§

4/

A  K.l\£agaraj, Adv.)

M£Afig§Q:gm£m@y

:APPELLANT

:RESPONDENT

This MFA is flied under Section 173 (1) of MV Act

“against the Judgment and award dated 20.05.2004 passed

in MVC No.38/1999 on the file of the Civéi Judge (Sr.Dn.) &

JMFC & Addi. MACT, Chintamani, partiy aiiowing

petition for compensation and seeking enh_anCe’i*ri–ent’

Compensation with interest at 12% RA.

This appeal coming on for :a’d:rniss»i.ori_'”th’i’s:7~d.a3′.,:

MANJULA CHELLUR J., delivered thex_foi’§«owing’:3;A ‘
Jupei/§”Ew: i

Heard the learned ;i’oz_r::tVhVie..Lvap_peiiant so also
the learned .Vcoi,in.-.se! — Insurance
Company. ‘

i’ sit’ the appeiiant met with

a motor aiccident in bi–ma!ieoiar fracture of ieft

an¥::§_’é:i wasV”‘ho.sp’itaiised at Government hospitai at

‘C:h’i’n.tasnVa’r1i;’«for–._sorne days and then, he was shifted to

D’e\./’aira;’VUr7s’j_ Medical Coiiege Hospitai at Koiar. It is also

not is”: dsspnte that the accident was due to actionabie
Aii.fl.nAegi”i..g’enr:e on the part of the driver of the offending

— xx/’ehiieée. No appeai is flied chailengéng the said opinion of

Hvthe MACT, Chintarnani.

3. Coming to the question of
quantum of compensation, having ‘”r’ega.rd”,to_,.the.faVct–.itha’ts
the fracture is united with angulatio’.-1_iandiirreguiari–ty._o’f._V

medial maileolus which has-ifesultevdgin-..,?§2,°/6a:4d’isabilityii’

which definitely mean.’ to.’ suiféer-i with pain
throughout his iife notihiolnisy life but also
in his occupatvions’ as ‘heviiowns 7 acres of
land and his’ “r.e_q’-uiii«’ed,V_we are of the opinion
that the coifh’pVVensa’twi.er’i§ so far as injuries, pain
and on the lower side, so also no

amount isV’iawa.rdVed Vtovwards the hospitai charges inciuding

att_e’hdan’t_ Vnouri’shm_ent and conveyance for about 30 days

»a[t*meva_ra.,i u_’r”s Medical College Hospital at Kolar. With the

n~atu.r’eV.oi”é–‘f;*-acotuire he suffered, it wouid not have ailowed

g himktos go back to his agricultural work at ieast for a period

uh”:j.o’f’iithree months. Therefore, compensation has to be

— awarded for 3 months towards loss of income during laid

“up period. So far as quantum of compensation towards

future Foss of income due to disahiiity of10% to the whoie

body, we are of the opinion that the triai

awarded the amount. Even ioss of antaen_’iti.e’s{fis4_ not

awarded which has to be awafdediw

foilowmg amounts are requér_ed_4to yaiN-ardedvzkyi 1 2
Heads ” A_nmuunt ‘V
” _ (in ‘Rooees)’:§

Enjuties, pain and..s:uffe’ring~ “~–.__’».,y/.A30_fOOO/~

Medicat expensesypsonveyari,ce’,'”‘.
Nourishment’-andatte_rjdanf’W_g_ ‘ ”

Charges fl” . “””1’5,000/-

t;oss’ of eashonths
Atthe rate.V_of~-Rs._8Q_/”~'<per day 7,200/-

, 'Loss of ahienitieis or life 10,000/–

' .V bass ofyéfuturewearning due to
1.0% 'disabiiéty to whoie body 31,680/-

VA's:=."'VTotai 93,880/– rounded
»»»»»»»»» ~~ off to
Rs.94,000/*

it Accordingiy, the apbeai is aiiowed in part with

__costs. The aopeliant is granted compensation of

Rs.94,000/~ instead of Rs.S9,000/– awarded by the

Tribunai. The enhanced amount shalt carry interest at 6%

/<7

p.a. from the date of dam petition tit} the date of deposit.

6 weeks' time is granted to the respondent

Company to deposit the above said compe_t}sa'té,on[a'm"otitzt–«,t i

from the date of receipt of a copyzlhottiitjis ..o'i*de-Ir'. « "

sac*