High Court Karnataka High Court

Rajani @ Chakrapani vs Sridhar S/O B L Lingaiah on 22 September, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Rajani @ Chakrapani vs Sridhar S/O B L Lingaiah on 22 September, 2010
Author: N.K.Patil And K.Govindarajulu
 

IN THE HIGH COURT or KARNATAKA AT BANGAILORE
DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF' sEPTEMB1a:R}9;tj1H:"0;.,

: PRESENT :

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTIGE 1\r_}K,,V'.i?H'.I.*:t;   

ANI5j  ' 3
THE HON'BLE MR.  

M.F.A.,NO.   
Between: ' '  5  "   

Sri. Rajani @ Chakrapan'i.._ V

S/0. Sri. Punnu Rangslrfi,' -:1 _   - 
Age: 42 years'. N3}, =:   _ 
R/0. N0. .4--5;»vJayashr'e<_e .Bi1asIs:a1*.;v .

Bale Maridi, _Binni"Pet,""H.'.'j 
Banga1VQre¥'56O'Q;53. , " V' A' 

 'V 7'; ' _  . ...Appe1iant
{By Sri. Suresh?,_M.-_Latu'r;.AdV0[catg:)'"--. ' '

And:

1. Sri. S;-idh4a;r,"  ~  V
S/'u..VB.L.':L'Ifiingaiah,  """ 
Age: Major, Occ: ]E3"u.siness,
R/0; No. 'r2H9'3., 25th .,Ma1n Road,
Jayafi agar 9"' B'i.Qck.,:' ' V 

 V' .___Banga1or§:¥560. 0659. 

'   ,Ger2erHi.. Manfiger,

 « ''?Ye'r31wada,..Pune--411 006.

 'Bajajfilijanz General Ins. Co. Ltd.,
C . "G,E.. if-'1.azai;«.. Airport Road.

 Respondents

‘._'{By Mahesh, Advocate for R2;
R1 ‘~”-Notice served and unrepresented)

%n/

S,

=i=$*=f=*=|¢

This MFA is filed U/S 173(1) of MV Act the
Judgment and Award dated: 07/02/2005 pa~ssed____in”
No.lO67/2003 on the file of the XI Addl. _-.5’udge;’vvNIer:I’1beer,

MACT, Court of Small Causes, BangaIoreV,__S’CCH_}’l2, pa:’I_:ly*__
allowing the claim petition for_conipensationf;and_see’i;ing.

enhancement of compensation with interest -at .1%29e.p.’e,_ A’

This MFA coming: on Hea1§i.t1g;’
N.K. PATIL. J., delivered 1:?1C”‘f91louring: V i it 1. ‘

t U

W-GM

This appeal against the
impugned’ 7*” February
2005, on the file of the
XI Motor Accident Claims
Tribuinalil couft Causes, Bangalore, SCCH–12.

[for short, “Tribunal” ) for enhancement of compensation

gfound that, the compensation of 377,200/–

favour as against her claim for ?O4.00

lakhsfi itiadequate.

2. The appellant claims to be aged about 40

years working as coolie, earning a sum of ?5,000/« per

./
Aw

[

6. After hearing learned counsel for the ._ parties

and after perusal of the judgment and award. by

Tribunal including the original records planed’

we are of the View that, the oo_r:.urrenceWof” ‘ _

the resultant injuries sustained

dispute. It is also not aged

about 40 years and After going
through the compensation we are
of the considered has rightly
towards pain and

sufferings: towards medical expenses;
?2,OO’A0’/V_–” nourishing food and

attendant’ fchaiéges-; ?30,o00/- towards loss of

,ari1eriities,~nnhappiness and discomfort; and $7,200/«~

.tOfVJfc;tI’dS._i of income during treatment period.

Thereforefit does not call for interference.

7. However, the Tribunal erred in not awarding

V’ “any compensation towards loss of future income. In

View of the injuries sustained, the appellant has taken

/4/»

is allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award

dated 7th Februaiy 2005, passed in M.V.C..I\Io§f”–«.i’Ov67/

2003, on the file of the XI Additional Jsi&ge’,:’gi’pi§i1§ g

Motor Accident Claims Tribunal*;”C.our.-5; of j

Bangalore, SCCI-I-12, is hereby

sum of ?43,200/– in to” the -compvens’ation of

?77,200/- awarded irite’rest: at 6% per
annum, from the it the date of
realization,» V l i V’

T directed to deposit the
%43,200/–, with interest
thereon: at within four weeks from the
date’ of the judgment and award.

. finch deposit by the Insurance Company, out

1 of compensation of 343,200/~»~, 50% of it

with vproportionate interest shall be deposited in Fixed

* Deposit in any Nationalised or Scheduled Bank, in the

of the appell nt, for a period of five years,

renewable for another five years, with permission toher

to withdraw the periodical interest.

The remaining 50% of the enhanced

with proportionate interest shall’ 35e’re1ea.secl«

the appellant, immediately,

Office to draw award,”a:ccordi1Vig,ly.V_

BM’-J’.’.’ _