High Court Karnataka High Court

Tousif Mohammad Gous … vs Sri C.Muragesh S/O Chinnusamy on 3 September, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Tousif Mohammad Gous … vs Sri C.Muragesh S/O Chinnusamy on 3 September, 2010
Author: A.S.Bopanna
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA 

CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD  1 f »

DATED THIS THE 3rd DAY op sEPTEM;~3EE,SA§dié%"j  

BEFORE  

THE I-ION'BLE MR. JUSTICE  

M.F.A. No. 24oAI.§;2ooS'~-;M'v; '

BETWEEN:

TOUSIF MOHAMMAD GOUS ,E{HP..DIAKHIWALE
AGE 17 8:, HAL.F"{_EjARS;_ I     '
oCC PAINTER-.,{NQW_.N1L)  _ _. . ,
SINCE IVIINOR  NA?CI*-I.}RALI--GLIAA12D1AN
FATHER SHR1 1$'£C§}7IA1\1iVIAI3(iO[JS KHADIAKHIWALF
AGE 50vY'}33ARS- OCCZ: 'CO'O_I;'IE 

R /0 NEW GANDVHL NAGAR -BELGAUM

... APPELLANT

(By Sri. VI'I"F}jAL.  '-I._']5".AL13ig;~"-,.f)V)

  V  IIIII 

 1.:  .,SR.I,1C..IN:URAGESH S /0 CHINNUSAMY

'  AGE'--MAJjOR~~OCC BUSINESS
A -1::/0 'N-"<3. 1&4/1 STH CROSS KALASIPALYAM
._NEw ~F3_XTI'ENSION (KPN EXTENSION)
BANGALORE

' K " '  'A = S..THE'D1v1S1oNAL MANAGER

A. _ THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD
'CLUB ROAD
BELGAUM
 RESPONDENTS

” (By Sri.M.K.SOUDAGAR, ADV. FOR R2

R1 «» NOTICE DISPENSED WITH )

E

33:

Ix.)

THIS MFA FILED U/8.173(1) OF THE M.v.AcT,
AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND AWARD DATED: 27-08-
2oo9, PASSED IN MVC No.329o/2006 ON THE FILE) OF
THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE (sR.DN) BELGAUM, PAIQTLY
ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION
AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPE3NSA”[T.I.ON,.:’ ‘ A.

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADl\_/ll’:”3.:SIC)_1l\l:’l’l-l1’t’3: _

DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE__FOLL()Wl’NG’:

JUDGMENT A

The Claimant in MvC’iN”e.,,.329o~;2005′ :b_:efo.rC’; this” I ”

Court, seeking enhancenie-n.t”v-.o’f.._ Corripensation as

against the sum awarCl’elcl’by

Counsel for the parties and
perused th-ellappeal ipvapeébs.

The Iiatur.e’ of the injuries suffered by the

Cwl:aimAaa:t’is”Iest*ablished by the document at EX.P~6. The

had suffered the fracture of Fibula at upper

1/3Id”is’:.estab1ished by X-ray, which were produced

the Tribunal. The doctor was examined before

Tribunal as PW»2 and he has stated the limb

disability at 30%. The Tribunal after noticing the same

g

DJ

has rightly come to the conclusion that the claimant

being a student of 16 years old, the said

cannot be considered for future loss. Howe’ver,Vi”und’e’: ‘

the head of loss of amenities an-diuture-_< unh'a~ppiriessi'a

sum of Rs.30,000/– has been

another sum of Rs.5,000/~ theusaidi j1ieiéi&ii'is £0 be'

awarded.

4. With regard toiithe injuries, since
it is not in _disopu_te fact that the

injured was ajgei(:l’iaboiut–,sl’6.__years,» the amount towards

pain and– suffe’ri’ng”i.s lower side and as such a

sum of lé’s«..4li’:3,Oi(i)iO_/h–;_i’siawarded. Further, to make good

the’i;sho’1’tVvfalliu’nd_e_r all other heads a sum of Rs.S,0OO/–

‘ rl’-.herefore, the claimant in all is entitled to

tiiei”ienhan::_einent of Rs.25,000/- with interest at the

sarnerate and manner as awarded by the Tribunal. The

enhanced amount with interest shall be deposited by

the Insurance Company within a period of 6 weeks from

the date of receipt of copy of this order. On deposit, the

amount shall be disbursed to the claimant. it is further

ordered that out of the initial amount of the

compensation awarded by the Tribunal, 50°/gr.ojf..»_tt}1e

same shali also be released to the claimarit ~

with proportionate interest shallbe

In terms of the above’, .,3.ppea1_V_i’s

order as to costs.