High Court Karnataka High Court

Hanumantharaddy S/O Hemaraddy … vs Mr Vishwanath S/O Shivappa … on 26 August, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Hanumantharaddy S/O Hemaraddy … vs Mr Vishwanath S/O Shivappa … on 26 August, 2010
Author: A.S.Bopanna
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CERCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD

DATED THIS THE 26'"! DAY OF AUGUST, 2030. E: "

BEFORE) N
THE HONELE MR. JUSTICE AS"."13OCPANNAAEV:_" 

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL No..11E64n9/2O'O«5A{2~2:\z) " 

BETWEEN:

AND:

HANUMANTHARADDY  
S /O. HEMARADDY SAw_K'P.R, «_
AGE. 60 YEARS, " '
R/O. MAGALA, V

TOHADAOAL1,  __ ;
BELLARY DIST"R1CT.' 

 "  . .. APPELLANT

(BY SRE.   ADVTS.)

MR.VISH"WA'NA'I'I~£ "  V.  "  
S/O.SHIVAP_PA VMULIKERI 
OWNER OE NIAHENDRA MATADOR
BEAE{1NO.NO. KA727[3404,

 " *  12/  KE_RIl'vEvALLAPUR;" '
 T13- wRANE.BE§'\H\JVUR.

A 'FHE'._DiV'IE'§'L'I'():N'AuL"MANAGER

THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE
CO.,"LTD._;, SHAMANUR BUILDING,

T.NAEASARAJ PET,

' '  _DAvANGERE.

.. RESPONDENT

“(E3Y*E3E{I. P.H.PAWAR & KSURYANARAYANA EAO, ADVTS.

R2);

2
«SEA

(‘J

MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST–.__TI-IE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 25/10/2005 PASSED IN.._Mx{c.
NO. 13/2000 ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE (S’R;D–N-,3

ADDL. MACT, RANEBENNUR, PARTLY ALLOWING
PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING EN”N_AN(;EMEN*I.* ‘A

OF COMPENSATION.

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR I~ll33ARIN?;’r *r.I;:1’S

COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING”:
JUDGMENVDIL’ _
The appellant–elaimar1t_.’Sis Court Seeking
enhancement Of cornpensation awarded in

MVC No.13/2000.

2. Heard the”iea;f_hSed.._COunsel…fO_r”the parties and perused

the appeal papers.’

3. The fate”:tl’1at_thel’clai’fnant had suffered injuries in the
acaeident ‘€KIf_l*l’ilClfs1.eV:OC.CurF(3ll.Clll’U1’I’l4.2.1999 is not in dispute. The

clailtnante.lh’adyA s1,Iffefed:lfracture Of the left clavicle and Scupula. In

regai’d,l”the doeignient relating tO injury and also the treatment

Vh.av4e’.been tnaiikedl as E3x.P.6 to P8. Apart from the evidence

the Claimant, the doctor was examined as PW.2 and he

I. Z the disability to the limb at 35% to 40%. Though in the

‘_’vnerrnalwleircumstance the disability to the whole body Could have

2.
E
St

a

5. In terms of the above, the appeai stands disposagi of.

No order as to Costs.

sub/–