High Court Karnataka High Court

C Basavarajappa vs Vijaya Kumar on 4 December, 2008

Karnataka High Court
C Basavarajappa vs Vijaya Kumar on 4 December, 2008
Author: Huluvadi G.Ramesh


IN THEE me}: emu’: OF KARNA”I’AKA AT Bsxzsssazczzzzxif ~ E T’ , ‘

Dated this the 4″‘ day effiecember, mos

Befare –

?}’§EII{)N’BLEz1IR.I£?S?}'”C£;’ HL?Lo’:é»;z:1;’1’_’:;*’T’1Lzi;1e:E;*;§f

Afzstzeilarseaus Ftrstxippeid’ X .2.;€r«?6′ {‘:i2″I*}

C Basavarajapgka Sic Chmuxabasappa ._

52 }ffS, Agriculturist & Kirani E/Ierc;§ia21tT — . ‘

Rim} Chiickabetmunl, Chitradurga Tq V V ‘
Bharamasagara Hcsbli, Chitmdurga “” — * _ «V ” zzippellant

(‘By Sri M T Eager: zxz: a1~1.%an, .. . _ ;. ‘

Am};

I ¥’§ay’aKumar{%%k %
Ric: Cfrikicabemazzr ‘ M *
E133ram3;<3:«:ga:'aHcb;1i' V.

Chiflaénrgé District. ” . ‘

V. Bratégfiii Managwa ”

. N’:2wVIne:iia :’%;s§11rance'{:b”Li;Vtd
~. , ‘fit. (}f£ice,.C1t3r–.C0«og;se1’ative Bldg.

. Respnndents

‘ ‘ .___ . , (By 3:4’; ;3L’mg;4, ‘;A§.~iv;)

Appeai is fiiad under 8.173(1) 9f the Meta: Vellicles Ac?

{ ‘tv:;»._.set aside the judgment and awarci dated 17.12.2005 in MVC
I471t§:’fZi}’Q4 _h§; the MACT, Chixadurg.

First Appeal coming on fear Orécrs this day, the Ceurt delivered

. Q __ j ‘fiaiiowing: J”,

JUDGM*’l:’zVT

A§fI¢€=:’i§ is by the ciaimant seeking enhancement: of cexhfiénggatiéh’ ‘as; ‘

against the awatfi passed by the Addh 1\!i.{3iC'”£’,”-Chi%ifiaéufigé v§1; V

l4I6f20{14 011 l?.12.2(}05.

According to the claimant, A .é:*:u__u.r:’ri– gear
Gewramanailalli 01: NH 4 xzeari1zg;..§§£.I3azTnas~ag¥’»§Ar:~ ‘L_i§.r£1Vits.wh#§n” hcvwasviagoing as
a pillimz rider on the vehicie bearifig’ (in; to the negligent
éziving of the vehicle b}f_ii~sV;*i<icr:até}i*euV{-i&;13 afipliea brake, the
vehicie toppled dcsgvn dawn and sustainad
initzries. He {fva&«*emment hespitai and

thereafter, hefiteok fiéfiéiifififij &1$¢%»<¥11 ¢fc,__

Amrémg' :9' him,' fin:-ant Rs.S§,0G0:"- {awards rnedicai

expenses. Ciaimifig. ccnzpégxsatépii' Rs.3,5G,E}fi0?~, a ciaim petition was

Evvag c0niést£:§….by the Irzsurance Cempany as ihe Qwner

expazjté, an the pleaéings, the Trihurzai having raifieé three»

V issues'f;)§'cérns§de§?%§$é(§:gVafier enquiry, whiie answering issue 1 has held that

ting acciééixt to the negligent driving ef the motorcycie by it

' ziéafisfiiaxgly, flit the injuries sustained i.€., fracture sf Eoadsfia Iaterai of the

:_{_ig_ht'1'ii:a}:ia:and tibiag awaréad mmpensatian cf Rs.s2,m9<- with 6% interest.

)3!'

.3nd9r61m?f:¢' 'V

Next saiisfied with the said award, slaimant is befere this C9urt&.s:@ef'Vj«§ngL-fi;:r '

ezzxhancemsnt.

Heard the cm1nse}r$presentin.g the paziieé;

Cemzsfl representing the c3aim;im:__ subifgéttéii

claimant has sustained grievnus injuxies right liimifihe ‘jh3s :;’xt been
suitably awarded. Tim ciairnantvi§f:Ké doizig kifaaéa biisézjess was 3:30 an
agéculnxrigt and he has not been awafzigd Lfbf f§1e.–i3:§sv gfitenéties and aim

iewariis 1035 0ffi;turei:x¢’:’:;1j;;:§,–due::§: t§ac.:’disabi§it§é_’~a::ffgéd by him,

Per c<),;a'ir3; ;i§3fv't}1€%"C:%§p£.;Iné;3é¥i$v .§u§§mitted that the claimant is a
pfliien ricisr ma as' perViixzijpggliey'i;s}§ii3–i£in2;:~:ansi;:stionV.5is£r.;r¢{éd by the Tribunal requirezs interference-

” ‘E! seen as per the Wfiiiiid certificate, éhe claimant has sufihreé

efbc-ih Emnes of the right leg viz, fibula and tibia iateral cenflia far

._s$;}iich Rs.4’3,QG(}§~ has been awardeéi ttzwards pair: and sufiéringg Rs.S,{)Q(}!–

fig’ .

Agspeai is aliowad §n part accordingly.