High Court Karnataka High Court

Puttaiah vs The Divisional Manager The … on 28 January, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Puttaiah vs The Divisional Manager The … on 28 January, 2009
Author: A.S.Bopanna


IN THE HIGH coma”? OF KARNATAKA AT B+§.:$iG:&§;()’#§F1»

DATED was ma 23*-h DAY.0F»JANi’fAI§f;f2;{iOi§
BEFORE’: %% A
THE HOWRLE MR. Jt:.s@;.mé;av’

MESCELLANEGIJS Fries? APPF;;§:,._NQ, mv)

BETWEEN :

wrmuan s/0 DODDAKAI.A$£A.H’ . A
AGEDABoU’M63?EARs
RIOBANDIHALIJ =
KASABA HQB.£J;C .F’A’IT+5¢.TAL_(JI{ H
rmssnw. PR?ESE_N’£fLY re/0 vmvzannnna
6 CROSS, SHANKARMUTifP§3£;D,« Iszg PURAM,
HASSAN’ **** – j, – …APPELLANT
{By Sufi: ”

AND: %
1 gqm mvrszengx. MANAGER

‘TH_Ei’r}E2§ENTAL’l’iiSURANCE
co’ LTD.”‘¥ENKATESHWARA BUILDING

‘ ” .. 3 ;\.a;_re«:jm1;$.’, HASSAN
“-.RA§IC§§’;Cz{)3§?DA
S/O-JAVZAREGOWDA

Rf GACHIKKANAGONDANAHALLI VELIAGE
HOBIJ, C R PATNA TALUK

9 MAHESH. ADV. FOR R1;

{:2 .

RESPONflEN’T’S

} THIS APPEAL IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT. AGIHNST
V JUDGEMENF AN!) AWMQD DATED 07.03.2067 PASSED IN
NO.1′?13/2006 ON THE FTLE’ 0F PRESiDING OFFICER,
V’ _’ A. FA$I”I’RACK COURTJH, MEMBER, ADDITIONAL MACE’, HASSAN,

$

F’

4. The AMACT afim considering

avaiaame baforc it has awameflwv 2-31¢ 43;

Rs.2,f)6,870/~, In this I1-,gard, iimi: .t.§m

wrfificatn was marked as’ §I;::,P2, Rarijaitthu the”?

fniinwing injuries :

“aj .I..acm’atr:d \&§’6i.r_T_1r’z’d” {fight leg
meat-mring. 4 X ” ahnormai
mnhility;”‘X?’f{§Vjf of tibia and

b) __ ‘«1′–!VET’§If3fi’. leg exjmsing
tfindotfi x:”a}*:’c1V bfinc ‘ « – _ f

c) was: an lefi: supra orbital

1:3} Mlzlfipig véihfasiéms both rfflrmw
% °e) :_ Abm.31on:’§ knee

‘ – .. _ :3 . Am,ga}us over ten: shmxkicr.’

— ‘ 17z:s:'{‘_>L¢%;:tTV.of the said injuries, the manner of tmatmtznt

afi1’%r __é§¥’ec:t of the same: has been stairad by examining

._ as P.W.2. Arxtnrding to the doctor them is

_.._””‘.iiis§1ahilit3r of 40% in his: right leg and 30’% to his Icfi: leg.

VTh1s aspect of the matter has in fact been nntiocd by the

Z

*5