Thimmakka vs Prathap Singh on 24 June, 2008

¥Sh¢§@iag'fl£m§1ex

I433 '?"£~§'E HIGH CSCHJRT €31? K?-?:.F.§3}§?'FsI€3-'\. AT EP:.N33R{.a{)F.E

$3553 THIS THE 34th 3%' 03' JUNE 2308

BEFGR3

ms Ho:~:'ms ;~:a..:us?:.cE,m=mm 3'rnAaE'93§vvj"_~.. 

mwealmema rust Appal.-'id;3413;'2oo5 é$*:_:V'  

BE'§'WEEfiE:

Thimmskka, 44 $3333
Wf3.iate Chikkarangagga ._
§£a.?ijjamaku:ika Vi;;age;.w.f~_'
Kfilélfi Hdnli, Knratagare ?a1uk"
Tumkur Bistrict. "*'-- * Ev'

   ;.A?P*EL£;A!~3'P
$53! 3:32. 2=a2:,-._e1  ;{-::v

R2133:

 

1.

?rath3§ Sinqh,kH3jer ‘.””

Ega.Bala§i”Sin§§ ‘ f ‘”_.

Prm§:$ri Ealaji*§mtarV~, _
fiérvica, 3@l2gumb§.T.A=_ »’
?umkur Tawfi, ” ‘ VW=

2.T§e fiew.Infii3.hs3uraficé
‘C;-;:m,§an§;*.?–A:Lim:Lt€sd, ‘*§*.:.1;m}-113;?
E Flcéz, §.H}R§ad

%umxa:,”_ …RESPGNEENTS

‘ >_ §ay*.3$§;9,B;fi§3h, Advucatu ta: raspondnnt ia.2,

aaspanfiantfiegi served)
V . «a~a~9~a~

;’Thi3 aypaal is filed unfler Sactian 1?3£1} at

:_%étca vehiclas Act against the judgment and award
fiatgfi 12.%.2Q§? gassed in M.V}¢.Ho.511!G1 on the

Eilé af the civil Judge§Sr.Dn) anfi Additicnal

~§mt¢: Resident Claima Tribunal, Madhugiri, partly

WSUN LUUKi U?” KI%KNfiW%K§’% WWHW Lwflfli Lil’ Kflflfiilkiflfifil HWSWW EWUKE U!’ Kflflwfiififlfl WIUW §..’$.2UK§ U’? EKJQWNREMRR H§%.¥E’fi MWMKE WW !3’§£&KNJ’;MM&i& flllafl L

%

usw”mWr#Io

w7.g5..3,..V..¢ W uwmmmwwammm fl””M\h..Wt§”‘”5 Mmm wt” mmnwmemm wmw LUUIH aw §WWENAYAK% HWH czwm” 0%” MRNAYAM MEGH £2″

aiiaing the ciaim getitinn far cemganaatian and
seekiag enhancement af aomganaatisn.

?hi$ apgeal gaming an for admissién” fihis

éay, fine caart gagged the fallcwing:-

JUEGMENT

?he appeal Gaming an Ear afimisgifin is fiékgfi

mg far fiinal flispvaal haying rfigarfi ta ta: 駢g#*,

af tha grasant aggaai.

2. It is 5e%§ ;q%ti%E§ %§p§11a$£Awhn was
warking as s_ Cea;i£ =w§%fl1i§§$E#¢ “in 3 mmtnr
wékicia acC§§¥§£ W$#r¢?§r &§§ fiad suffered severe
injuring§§m§’§%§’h§§§§§aii$eg”£sr fcur days and
haé fii&% *i§@e§§§¢T t§$at$éfitx for a lung periud
there%fté£.’ _ fig _t§i$fi bafikgrcuna, the agpellant

gaving é§gr&acha£ ‘tEa natar Accidant Claims

wafl Trifiu$§i?_ th§«wWT£ibuna1 an adjufiicatien has

»g§;;%a::s:2g~e;§’«3<g §:4~m1 sum as z::ss.1e,:3ao;~».

V 3,M: §fia caunsai fax the agpallant wauld

* submit that avan assuming that tha injuries are

3§#@3e injuries, the fact that the appellant was

figsgitaliaefi far four days and zeceivad treatment

éhereafter, the apgeliant wvuld be entitled ta a

6

“WM” “”‘””””” “””‘ “””””‘””‘””””‘”””‘”””‘””””””” ‘”””°’°'” “f”?”‘”:;’W”” W’ “‘WmW”‘M*”M Wwwm W*°*'”WW¢ W9?” WMWWWJM-“W WW?” Q-«UUW RM” Wwwflélfiflfis HIGH CUUK3″ W5’ %%WN&T£%i% 9433?? $5
3

anhamaament. In the facts and circumstzncefi at

the c&se aha in arder ta grant a just amoufit of

zsvsmgenaatiezxn, even assuming that theta igra-5.’_« .’€z’r;’§ éiV§i:t:: 3′,’:«
material praduced by the apgallant t§_§uyg§r§ th§_ a
claim, the further enhanaémafifmd£pcfimpéfi#2ti§fi7h§:

an additianal mm at’ Ra:’::,s§’,;1r;;§%::a;-é”_1._%.fa«~au~3.&–: “*~.§§._

justifiad, in the a9inianxfif,thiéV£¢u;t,x}w”””

6. Having ragafi§* ta; £§§ ;§#§unt fififififivud,
withaut antaringV upan Wgfi _fifi$§§v§fi’ §§§si&aratian
af tfieé matte:;°t§he iag§$él” %§Tu§§i&wed. The
aggellant i§w’§&§§£%%fi€i%iedfi.£§’=the aéditianal
:am@en3a$idfi*E #§t§ fi#4i§%§$fif= § Slabally with

interast at ii £§@§;§h§ d§t§ ¢f tha award.

Sd/…

V’ ., n Judge