E
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT
Dated this the 17th day of OCTOBER ?~«~mQ:§i- "
BEFORE
THE HONBLE MR.JUS'l"'ICE B5.<SREEN--'f';fASEI. :§GWDA%k« K x
MISC.F'IRS"I' APPEAL No)899'5,l:.'2(A)06"~
Between:
1
DASTHAGIR ' g
S/O LATE P.ACHA_KHAM <. _ '
AGED ABOUT:-34 isms * *
SRiBAE§2§':,KI:?I2Xi§£.: A
S/G Pficéea %
AGED%%A30UTj'
SR1 %
E~§,*'O_LATE. PACHA KHAN
A6139 :3BoU*r_32.YRs
"'Sf<1..,MI}NjEER KHAN
-I-_sj<:~. LAW};-VPACHA mm
W AGED 31 YRS
S1»1'1? SABAIRA BI
W/{:2 "RYDER ALI KHAN AND
A' ' I3/0 LATE PACHA KHAN AGED ABOUT 35 YRS
'»-ALL ARE R/OF JOTHIPURA OPP T0 OIL Mild.
AND NEAR RICE MILL HERUR POST
KASABA HOBLI KUNIGAL TQ
TUMKUR DIST
... APPELLANTS
{By Sri. : M V MA_HESEiWARAPPA )
g
MVC
é day",
A RANGANATHA
s/0 LATE ASWATHAPPA
PRODUCTION TECHNICIAN IN MICO. 5AJff H.
OWNER OF MARUTHI CAR BEARING 3
R"E(}N.NO. KA--~O1 MA769 j;
No.33 NEAR GARDEN SCI-I0"OL'v__ 'A
T DASARAHALLY = ' . "
BANGALORE 57
NATIONAL INSURi&§~ICEA..f:{)ALTD"
REP. BY ITS BRAIw$C§~I_ n;1A§Ac§.*?::i2
MARUTH1 INSURANCE R-NS:'VM_£IFC}R§5w__
YESHAVAN'§_HAPURA.::'» V
BANGALORE
m1.:<:*z T%V%1~:Q.<*;it:3<§9 30 VAIJD' FROM
19;~_5~20Q5'-?{TQ_» %13T+e--1-was %
RESPONDENTS
_MFA.P’i-LED U/S 173(1) OF’ MV ACT AGAINST THE
.JUDGME{NT’AND AWARD DATED: 12/05/2006 PASSED IN
N0. 7-887/2035 ON THE FILE OF THE CNIL JUDGE
‘,§sR.:3.;v} ‘& MEMBER ADDL. MACT, KUNIGAL, PARTLY
AI,E;QWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION 8%
= R ..fSE’.EKING ENHANCEMENT <31? CGMPENSATION.
This Miscfiirst Appeal coming can fer
the Court delivered the f€)110WiI1gZ
(By Sxéi 3 A RAVIS.i~i;?§NI§AR FOR R2 , NOTICE TO R.No. I
' "DIsPEimEDV-.wrrH ' %%%% " 3
hearing this
— JUDGMENT –
That on 10-7-2005 when the deceased was
tewards her petty shop on the footpath
gate on Madd”ur–Kuniga1 road, a
No.KA.02.MA.?’69 came from sicig
dashed against her. As , Q. r§§$2,1 it,. 2
succumbed to injuries on _t§
med the claim pet1t:;£§,_n { %1§o~;887/2065, seckzing a
compensation of R$.rcspondents. The
jiiéigfiient dt. 12-5-06, awarded
them. a”cen1pe:iss;t:anv%§r. %§;:..1,6s,ooo/-. Agrieved by the
q_uant;u_m c§ft’~~ awardedi by the Tribunal, the
‘~a3’e Vbei’t)i4e this Court for enhanczcmcnt of
%%~coi<:pensvIi0i1;{%%
E2: is no dispute regardring the death ef the
., :5;aC6a$3<§1V" in a meter road accident occurred on 10-7-05 dug
rash and negligent driving of the Mama van and no
"éf§ma1 has been filed by the ewner and insurer of' the said
czar, chaficngng the finding of the Tribtmal on £33116 No, 1, the
01217.: issue that remains for my ca-nsidcratjcn is whether the
4
compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just andfilroper or
it is required to be enhanced.
3. Among the appellants, 1 to 4
deceased and appellant: No.5
Therefore, they are entitled V’ go Ahleavarded. .V
under the head loss of andwl’ Waifection.
Although the eompensation
under the said two compensation
towards lose oiloéloi1le,t%l.–.”g,sv~’:I0$S of estate of the
deceased’ Therefore, the learned
Counsel “appellant requested this Court to
take E25.-v].,5Ol5AAfo1″d’ of calculating loss of estate.
fie. A learned Counsel apmaring for the
that, a reasonable sum may be
‘ _bakei1«.whi3e-eelculafing loss of estate. I feel, if Rs.1,000/- is
l H H ” and loss of estate is worked out, it would mat the ends
‘_’_&e.of’jiist$ce and the amount of compensafion awarded towards
T ’10$’s of estate becomes double. Accordingly, a sum cf
3 HRe.1,»44,O00/« as against Rs.?’2,0¢30/- is awarded towards
loss of estate. Rs.?’E$,00O/~ awerded by the Tribunal towards
R
1055 of love and afffiction at the rate of Rs.10,OO0;;”‘agai31st
each of the ciaimants is just and proper and
reasonings and tht’:I’€:f()I’C, it does not call “€3IIi’i§§§iIICCi11C11t:”.,__
Similarly, Rs.2(),0O0/- awarded t)ti14r:éfV
ceremtmics aiso does not ca1l,3’i’0;j ,u¢’){)%’:) )*;-
awarded towartis transmrtaticid reasonable
and thercferc, it does 7afj’or;V:_aj:1y..ezi1 ha;1ccment.
4. Thus a;§pegIj3;:1tsVA”‘éi:fcVV for enhanced
cempensafi:ti’Vc§f”-Iéé’;+099/1* at 6% pm. on the
ttnhanced the date of petition till the ciatc
of its actuai
v :w3,spofi(i*cz1t«~= Insurance Co. is dimcted to deposit
amount within two months from the date ef
V . re-ct:i§;:t éi” a {if the award.
AA ‘_ Aééordingly, the appeal is allowed. Juclgrnant and
by the Tribunal is modified to the extent statcd
above. No erdcr as 1:0 casts.
Sd/-é
Judge
mini-