IN THE HlGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 9"' DAY OF' NOVEMBER 2010 1 Q
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRJUSTICE S. ABDUL NAZEEE. "
MISCELL__ANEOUS FIRST APPEAI. N0; 63312/QQIORR
& M1sC.CvL.N0.18725(2010' '(M1/J.
Between: " ' V
Valli D'S0uza,
S/0 late Siril D'S0uza,
Aged about 59 years, _e "
Special Grade Driver, BSN L Offi_ee,=_ V
Resident of P & T c,o.1en3t, 2"d;jstage;,
Lakshmipuram, §Ad1.i_n3an'e'Roadtf, R =
I-Iassan. " Appflllaflt
(common)
(By Sri B.:'Che11'tan;
And: ' "
1 Putte G0v§7da.,V_VV V.
Sftég N2mjeg0wda.., _ _
Maj or]; :r/()* No.6, Kdkkanaghatta,
» "I-I_Vartt1n1a;1thé1pu_ra Post,
V .¢'_.L.Ias3a:rt»--.T}"a1ui;,v
2
tj~By.Sti PE. Raju, Adv. for R2
United .India Insurance Co. Ltd.,
Venkateshwara Buildings,
E ;B'.M.E{0ad, Hassan. Respondents.
(common)
Notice to RI dispensed with)
This MFA is filed under Section 173(1) of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and award dated 3.5.2010
in MVC No.-425/2009 on the file of he Principal Civil Judge”.
(Sr.Dn.) and Add]. MACT, Hassan, etc.
This Mi.sc.Cvl. is filed under Section 15} of CPC i” it
return the LCR to the Tribunal forthwith, etc.
This MFA and Misc.Cvl. coming onghfor l_ T
Court passed the following:
This appeal is directedfagainstpptlteipfidlgtnenthlaiidltawaiid in
MVC No.425/2009 dated 3.5.V2′(l-toen’-thpeinlel Principal Civil
Judge (Sr.Dn.) and Add]; Motorficcident Hassan.
The appellant -washtiter-..c]ai,in’ant”before the Tribunal and the
respondents were the owner the insurer of the offending
Vehicle. ,”!Therei’is no dispute as to the occurrence of the accident and
the lia’bi}i_ty of’the.se.:ond respondent — Insurance Company to pay
compensation’.’lll–‘l5:hep’s:=.appellant has filed this appeal. seeking
enhancernentlof compensation.
_w…»_….s.:.;…..
2. Learned Counsel for the appellant would contend thatV.th.el”e._
Doctor, who had treated the claimant, had opined that the _cIai.rnant: ;_. ll ‘
had suffered 28% permanent disability to the particuEar»lln}bl
claimant was a driver by profession. He is v»1_orkingjvith’ Al
It is contended that after retirement,-..__the cliairnant-c.:oultlv.h§1Ve_:§
gainfully employed by driving private Plavingiregard to
the permanent disability thelalcicident, he cannot
drive the vehicle. The Trihuizal taken into
consideration awarding
has taken me
through the:’eAvidencelCof, ‘partvir§$’,»…;he documents produced by the
appellant/clairnant ‘before as also the impugned
judgmentfiandtawardl” ” A V
hand, learned Counsel appearing for the
second responadenlt–Insurance Company has sought to justify the
= V iinlapzi gned judgment and award.
5
1.
4. As noticed above, the claimant is employed with the
BSNL. Therefore, there cannot be any loss of future income till
date of his retirement, Had he not suffered the injury,
could have engaged himself in driving private vehicl–es:.fl:Ia*sring
regard to the totality of the facts and circunl,stan:c.es fofithe case,’ it ;, if
just and proper to grant an additionalrsurn of ?’;25_,(i)U0/~« [‘€)\fili/i’3VVf:Cie543._1()SE:’..:i§
of amenities. He is also entitled for an V%’E5Y%i{i)0U[M
towards pain and suffering. iggntitled for an
additional sum of $40,000/– said sum
shall carry interest compensation
under all other heads i’sx_i” ‘and”proper. ‘
the resunlt’;-.the appeal succeeds and it is accordingly
allowed-. in _part.g{l’lie_’ second respondent–Insurance Company is
directedto’ dieVpe.s’i:t. of ?40,UUO/– in addition to what has been
awarded thy the Tribunal with interest at 6% per annum from the
ofihe application till the date of deposit within a period of
«i
E!
eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The
appellant is permitted to withdraw the amount on such deposit.
6. Office is directed to return the LCR to Z
forthwith. Misc:.CvE.No.1.8725/201.0 standie aim/ed”‘ttaciegraihgiyg’f,,_T
N0 costs.
BMM/–