' . 'A 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BAN DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF ocToEE_E;'*20.V1'Oj _ PRESENT THE I.-ION'BLE MR. JUSTIC-E N.K,15A1'IL' A A... ' 7 TI-IE HON'BLE MR.JUS:Ti.C E..H.S.KEMfiPAxNNA _M.13'.A.jNO:.6;335/~20.QE5 (Mv) BEN/EEN:_ " 1. A.M.NA'BV1VRA:'s2E§U': ~ S/O"LATE 'MA}E:3fiVlMED ALI, ' AGED ABoUj"...58.YE.ARs__ -- 2. SHAJIDA. . A , AGED 58..m.ARs, vgr/o_A.M.N.AE1 RASSUL SAB * _"AGED'~:2'2._YEARs ' .;DA/O.A.M.NABI RASSUL SAB A -ALL ARE..'R/A NO. 12/ 1/225, 1ST CROSS, EHOAKNAGAR, ANANTHPUR, AP. APPELLANT * (COMMON) $R1.R.c1-1ANDRAsHEKAR- ADV. FOR LAWYERS NET) 1. SFAMIDA AGED 25 YEARS W/O LATE A.M.ABDUL GASNE 2. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., LAKSHMI TOWERS, NO.200/3, I FLOOR, ADJACENT TO BANGALORE HOSPITAL, JAYANAGAR. BANGALORE ---- 560 O1 1. REP. BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER... _ 3. MARY MAJOR I W/O JOHN R/ANO.362, 7TH MAIN, SIDDAPUR, JAYANAGAR, BANGALORE -550 -01 I. RESPONDENTS
V – {COMMON}
(BY SRI.T.PARAMESHV~.IA:”m’¥PA;,I_& ” A’
SRI.K.M.SHANMUKAPPA ;_– ‘ADVS; EQR ;
SRI.P.B.RAJU–_ADV.EORR-2–.A _ ‘
NOTICE TO R–.3aD.ISPIjf3NSE_L3’ WITHj,v._V/O~DATED 14.11.05}
M.E;A.NO16-302/2«0,0~5,__ IS”‘.EILED UNDER SECTION
173(1) OF MV’l.A’;;}T AGA,INST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED22.2;2005i¥::FASSED IN”IvwC NO3176/2002 ON THE
FILE OF THE”._XI1IVAD-[)L”.-SMALL CAUSES JUDGE, MACT,
BANGALORE (SC-CH»A._NO.’15), PARTLY ALLOWING THE
CLAIM ‘I PE’FI’I’IO_N’S’– F’O.’R’*’ COMPENSATION AND THE
APPELLANTS . HEREIN… SEEK ENHANCEMENT OF
COMP.ENSATION.~ I’ ‘
M;*E.AINO.6’3’S’S/2005 IS FILED UNDER SECTION
» If73_IVI I ..OP IW ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED;-2,2.::.L2o05 PASSED IN MVC NO.2836/2002 ON THE
FILE’ OF XIII ADDL. SMALL CAUSES JUDGE &
ME.MEER,_ MACT. BANGALORE (SCCH NO.15}, PARTLY
ALLOWING’ THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION
AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
= THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING
. THIS DAY, N.K.PATIL J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING-
%M
1
petitions against the insurer ad owner of the ofienrding
vehicle, before the Tribunal under Section
Act, claiming compensation on account..ofu_:the=deat1fI,of,
the deceased in the road traffic :a,cCfjid’en”t,_’ ‘coiitlernding
that, on 11.8.2002 at about
deceased was crossing in of \/ilijaya Cafe
an autorickshaw came in
a high speed and das-hedge Due to which.
the deceased grievous injuries
and on the way to
hospltal.-.–.case of the appellants that the
deceasedlwas 38 years, hale and healthy,
as go1d____smith in a jewellery shop and earning
‘ month. He was the sole bread winner in
due to his untimely death, their hopes
and security in life have been jeopardised. The claim
A petitions came up for consideration before the Tribunal,
l which in turn, after assessing the oral and documentary
evidence and other material available on file, allowed
the petitions in part and awarded compensation of
?£._,.,,;7M–»~
I
?3,76,000/~ with interest at 8% p.a. from the date of
petition till the date of deposit. Being
said common judgment and award. the ..
presented these appeals claiming
compensation awarded bygthe Tribt_1fia1 logfissvof
dependency, and conventioniai«.heads and
it requires to be enhan_ced. if ” ‘ L
4. We have hearddthge appearing
for the _ Vfifmcfounsel for the
Insurance pic. 2.
of the impugned judgment
and award__’ ‘Tribunal. it emerges that, the
Tribfzgnal has “‘–cQr_1_1initted an error in assessing the
»income:_0f deceased at ?’3,000/– p.rn. The deceased
dwasiia by profession and the appellants have
clairunedrthat he was earning ?6,000/— p.m. and was the
A :~:f_”sAolev_bread winner in the family. Having regard to the
age and occupation of the deceased and taking into
consideration that the accident has occurred in the year
2002. we can safely re–assess the income of the
/
,/
KMMWW
9
mother of deceased, immediately, on deposit by the
insurer.
The remaining sum of ?36,500/- with _
interest shall be released inflm
respondent-wife of deceased, irnmeciiaieljg0ri°depbsif:1l;y
the insurer.
Office is directed to .the_»a\Ararc’.,:aeerdrdingly.