IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CIRCUIT EENCH AT DHARWAD _ _V
DATED THIS THE 6th DAY OF JANUARY, 2O;O~ ~
BEFORE " I
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. JAGANIJATIHAN-fi A
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEALINO .8892 /2oCVS[IMv_)V' "
BETWEEN:
RAJAN, S /O SOMASHEKHAR MOOGIV,
AGE 18 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT
R/O M.B.NAGAR, KOPPA TANK, DHARWAD.
' .. 5 _ ~ '=,....APPELLANT
(BY SR1. F.V.PATIL, ADV.) .
AND:
1. K.H.ARAE,4--At:-EI;§:A,JOR,._: ._
OCC:BUSINESSER/O-~H.NO;'3,1/1,;
MANKILLA STREET, DHARw'AD~.
2. THENEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO._'
BY ITS DEVISIONA1} MANAGER',
SAVITR1 SADAN, 'OPP; .I_<ITTL'E COLLEGE,
P.B. ROAD, DHARWAD. .
, - V " ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. »I<. SURYANARAYANA RAO, ADV. 81. SR! LAXMAN B.
.. _ MANNf{JDDP.R, ADV'; =ROR__R;; )
' A. 'IATPIIEIAPPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT
I -AGA;INS'T»v.THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 20.7.05 PASSED IN
MVAC"NO.398-/"2--OO3 ON THE FILE OF THE 1 ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE(SR.DN)
AND.__ CJM.,. i\'/IACT, DHARWAD, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM
PETITION<.FOR" COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF
I A CHVCOMPENSATION.
INTI-IIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Heard learned counsel for the parties in respect p
appeal preferred by the appellant for en.h_ai1cerr1:entliof.,VV
compensation. The liability is not ‘ ‘ V
2. Learned counsellifor’-.the a’ppella_ntv-VSi’;ii”‘F;VV’;jPatill”i
submitted that the MACT has _fail’ed to award«c_om.pensation
towards loss of future .and_ towards loss of
amenities of life.» In this rhedic’a1.V…pe’véidence of Doctor
was referredéto, byéigjtihe appellantfs
llll the?-Ioth’e~ra”’11and_;’submission of the learned
counsel”-for the insu:arivce’c.,oz:npany is that the Tribunal has
awarded eixciesvsp amountflunder the head of pain and
suffei«=ingfiand so far…._a,s<the disability is concerned, the Court
'zn.ay–.coi1_sider. the medical evidence.
.Vi}¥iaving thus heard both sides so far as the
if'"'.__l"~disabilit§zlis concerned, PW-2 has put it 10% for the whole
if taking the notional income at Rs.15,000/~ p.a.,
_FQ5wards loss of future earning capacity, the appellant will be
}r
I
entitled to Rs.27,000/–. On account of the disability,
appellant, according to the Doctor, has lost se1ni.sati_'ori"~Vof
smelling and some times he also behaves in _a':} ~
manner and taking these facts into; a,Ccoun_t',"to'wards'1o'ss
amenities of life, a sum of Rs.20,GO0
the claimant is entitled to Rs???'-,QOO/24-v.oi1 these' iWO.H(;QL;1I1tS. 2 i'
At the same time, the amount is onvitize» higher side tinder the
head of pain and sut'fe_i*i'ng »siarr_1e is reduced to
Rs.30,000/–. Thus, Aezchess head will be
Rs.34,500/–. Ei;[oweVe–r, [the_4_i.A_..co1'i1pensat1on Wlll be
Rs. 12,500 said 'a;:ficiia;i:it;'vv"i11"¢al}1y interest at 6%.
Appeal is hallowed. part.