Kumar @ Ravikumar vs The Oriental Insurance Co Ltd on 7 January, 2010

1 ;\1!":\ 3')2~§3.!{)£w'

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE 

DATED THIS THE 07"' DAY OF JANUARY 2o2_o.__""  

BEFORE

THE HONBLE MR..JuSTTcE L.NAFUi\YAN«'A".Tsv\!«.'5T:M'§4__  

M.E.A.No.3982/2ob3_c:r~~q_§2'j

BETWEEN-

KUMAR @ RAVIKUMAR,
AGED 37 YEARS,
S/O DASABOV2, '-   
R/A sOST,g_    V
BANGALORE S'OU_G'i--¢TT»'\LU'%<AI'."VAA "  7' ~

~,-~&_ G_A_fi , APPELLANT
(BY SRISHREPAD"~f.S~HAwST'Rf,"Ag}v.,}
A[\_L£2r»

1 THE QRlENTAL'INSU'RANCE CO. LTD,
 D;'O.x,'NAGARRAR_HA CHAMBERS,
 _ 2:3/22A1'7¢ 2"? FLOOR, 3"" MNN,
A  *4?' GROSS,'"OHAMARAJPET.
 ..E2ANG'AT,OR'E_A 560 004
= A S-v' ITS M';'\N}'\GER

)-

  K."T<EN.cH'ARPA,

A  [BY SR%.A.RAVf8HANKAR, AG'v.. FOR R1)

 M/SJEMATKSHMJ STONE CRUSHES,
 * HDNNTGERE, CHUNCHANAKUPPE,
. _THfiAvARE+<ERE, BANGALORE.
" "  RESPONDENTS

T

2 é’v’I!’5 3%-\f’3r'(I«’-I

THIS MFA lS FILED UNDER SEC.t73(t) OF

AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND AWARD DATED I.4_.’ttT.’2D£l7’fi.
PASSED IN MVC NO.6563i’2006 ON THE FILE THEj’~–Xfl’\f’._,_’i.
ADDLJUDGE, MEMBER, MACT, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES;.j
METROPOLITAN AREA, BANGALORE {SCCI—I’.”i’O).,:’~..PARTL’r’__
ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR”‘C’O«MPENSAT’i’O_N A-ND

SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. I

THIS MFA COMING on EoR’REARii\:o THIS:

COURT DELIVERED THE FOL.L.OWll\IT’C.A;_-I’ ” Q_

JuDD{EiMEp_m~_’ ; A I

The claimant’inV}/lVC;_Nog.8-I3B3i’2tj’C€5′–Vo_n_:fthe file of MACT’

Bangalore by itsi’oVrd:er. :t’4;t.–1 Regarded a compensation of

Rs.7,29,00*Q/–. ._

2. Deiinlg”agvg’réeIveD”DI} the same, the Claimant/appellant

“‘n.a_s pre’ieir.reEdGI:ti1is appe’a’lv.v– ….. .. *

IViefar.ned counsel for the appellant submitted that

the age’-of the eDIpVeIlPlant is 35 years and the relevant multiplier is 15.

*-P«I.fj;jHowever, trteR’Court below has taken the multiplier as 34. The

‘-ieIa’rIne.d»_cTo’unsel further submitted that in view of the judgement of the

I ?Court in the case of Serial Verma and others Vs. Delhi

“I

3 :\’I _”s9és’.7-1/t )3

Transport Corporation and another, reported in (2OD9)6 SCC”‘»i.2i

wherein the muitipiier has been taken as 16. Hence it

that, the said muitipiier has to be taken and compen.sa’t’i-on has to he

caicuiated. Secondly, it is submitted that Jnfitihe’ ‘iight–<.of t:itieV}"u'd_g.eVmeVnt

of this Court reported in 2002(5) KLJ 826131.-§3)i:".F?_amesh_*§¢t/s= Na}iehati"~

Insurance Company Limited and another,' in at si.m'iia.re jtiirctivmisitiaihce,
where the claimants suffer from paitaipi6iA§,;ii.C' state of he'a'i'tih,~"unabie to
attend his nature caiis indepertde'r1ti'y'..ahd sensation of
tower iimb which resuIt8._d_ in body, the Court
awarded compe.n-settiori.:§i;'._R's.i:t_,.}i5t.Q0O.I« suffering and in
respect of Court has awarded oniy
Fist ,OO,Of}€V3_;/W ._fo.'1 and Rs.50tOO0/« for loss of

amenities otiite,' The'iin§u'r'ed.–susttained 80% disabiiity of whole body

and he needs. an attendant throughout his life. in respect of the said

:';_head._n"o coinpens«a_tion has been awarded.

iAtt"er submission of the teamed counsei for the

appeiianlt, ..|e'a.rn.ed couhsei for the respondent No.1 W insurance

.VAV:V'Cuompar2~yA opposed for modification of the award and supported the

Hi gujdgtemieht of the Court betow

"i

sustained the 'followin.g_Vinjurie':3:

4 ;\-'El ,"%k}<\'2f[lN

5. The appeélant/claimant met with an accident”»ton

08.09.2006 at about 7.30 a.m., while he was travelling…tnj_&»a’__’ioi7ry”

bearing No.KA–4t–986, near Hunnigere, Thaverekere

the driver of the said vehicle has driven thesameonthersai’d.i_oadtV”in'”1

a high speed and in a rash and negligentATm_ar’:–n_er dL}>évaid’l.’t,ft”l’~lCT1′::’;[h’G’:V’V

appellant fell down from the said ‘t.4:e:t*:tcle and.sustainiedmuseviere
fracture and injuries. The cl,a.izmant«V.htimisie-*!.fhas been”era<amined as
PW»? and the doctor who as PW-2.

Exhibits have been4markedEast”Ears.lE§’f=.i:t»aV_i’i5Vt’The doctor who
treated the cla.ima.nt iitheiiiviclaimant sustained
disability 30% to the whole body. The

Wound Certificateirhasibeieni as Ex.P4 and the claimant has

‘ ii”; 1 ‘rv.,’T’enee’ri1ess pain over lower back at the level of lumbar
V ‘ first vertebrae;

iii»)… not able to pass urine ~– catheterised;
AA iii) 0. -lnability to move lower limbs ~»– sensation loss.
* Surgery thoracic E2 vertebrae and lumbar first and

second vertebrae pedicle screw fixation lumbar first
laminectomy with decompression of chord,

5 M1-‘.-\ 3952/:’;x

for {he natura¥ course of life, hence under {he said head. V!”

another Rs.5{),0OO/~. Accordingiyg the award és modified f—-

.4′, ,- .«

dh*