H€THEIHC%iCOURT(M?KARNATAKAJUTBANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 13"" DAY OF DECEMBER, 2010
BEFORE
THE HONBLE MRJUSTICE BSREENIVASE "
M.F.A. NO.1450/2009 [MV)
BETWEEN: A A
SR1. ALAN ISAAC BULLOCH.
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS,
S/O SRI.M.J.BULLOCH,
R/AT VEERABHADRESHWARA NII;A"r'A;
No.97/2, GROUND FLOOR,"«4TH_ 'CRC§_SS','={=. _
NEW MAIN ROAD, JEEVANAHALL.I','v"
COX TOWN, E I '
BANGALORE -- 5600"
.. . APPELLANT
{By Sri.R.KI"1Sh'néI
...... .,
I. MANAGIIIIG I DIRECTOR,
BANGALORE "I«I,E:rRO POLITAN TRANSPORT,
CORPORATION ,, DOUBLE ROAD.
BANGALORED560 027.
' MANAGER,
_UN"ITEIf) INDIA INSURANCE CO., LTD..
' OFFICE NO40, I81' FLOOR,
~ »_ LAKSHMI COMPLEX,
" OPP: VANI VILAS HOSPITAL, K.R.ROAD.
BANGALORE» 2.
. . . RESPO ND ENTS
[By Smt. Harini Shivananda, Adv. for R2, R1 notice
dispensed vide Order dt. 1w6wO9.)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173[1.}.__OF'MV"« H
ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD Dr"ff'ED';._._'I.
6.12.2008
PASSED IN MVC NO5292/2008 ON THE FILE’ OF
THE V ADDL. JUDGE, COURT OE I_SMALL”he-CAUSIES, ”
MEMBER, MACT, BANGALORE [SCCH.’2_,O}’ -.__’PA.R”I’LY
ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR”:CO{MF’ENSATI’ON
SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF CQP.4_i’3ENS;/A3ITION. . A V’
THIS APPEAL COMING ON’IfEOR ADMISSION THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE—F_”O-LLOWING:.+.A.
J U :1:
This appeal iS by the ‘ffovrffeliiiancement of
Compensatioh awards:-d ihe ribu:I1éI1.
2. Heard.’ the Iappegir is admitted and with the
C()i’1’S§3nt Of5th:eE’1e;1Tne’d’ Cgurisel appearing for the parties, it is
ta1{.en’LI.p”fOr Sposal.
Sake of Convenience, the parties are
wfreferifed to as they are referred to in the ciaim petition before
E7 I p 1
if The brief facts Of the Case:
On 04.05.2008, on Madhava Mudaliyar road when the
claimant was riding a bicycle near seppings junction the
driver of the BMTC bus bearing No.KA~–01~FA–858 drove the
same in a rash and negligent manner and dashed
him. As a result, he fell down and sustained inju.1jies.4. *
he filed a claim petition before the ll
compensation of Rs.4,00,000/–. The T
compensation of Rs.2,73,200/«~ wit’h_jintere.s’t»_at €59:/of
5. As there is no ‘-dispute ;_;:ega.rdi”ng occurrence of
accident, negligencesand ‘l.tlie:””.1,i.1isurer of the
offending xfehicle,0″t1’ie:”ion’ly”—–._p’oilnt that arises for my
consideration insthevvappeal
twhether”–the___compensation awarded by the
:Triblunal.0pis:just and reasonable or does it call for
I =enl.1anoeinen
6.AAfter.V0′.l’1earing the learned counsel appearing for
lpartiesz ‘a.,-and perusing the judgment and award of the
Tarn of the View that the compensation awarded by
. _ 0ti1e”i”*ri’bunaI is not just and reasonable, it is on the lower side
hence, it is required to be enhanced.
7. The claimant has sustained the following ir1jur’ies:~»
a) Fracture of left lower radius collies fracture ~
b} Laceration on right arm “ff: V
c} Fracture of lateral apicondyie right hume_rt:.s. V
The injuries sustained by the clairnant are eyideritll
the wound certificate Ex.P–5, case x-
rays ~ EXP55 to 63 and evidence of the
claimant and doctor,y who ‘_i.PWs–1 and 2
respectively. PW~2:_f” his evidence that
on 04.05.2008 Polyclinic and
Nursing Horne__ of left lower radius
collies fracturemand conservatively. From
0yy4¢,05.20.0%$l ‘to it 0s..l0s.200s and from 30.05.2008 to
lie-further stated that the claimant has suffered
15% a1s;amityllta;vho:e body.
ucotnsidering the nature of injuries, Rs.35,000/-
the Tribunal towards ‘pain and suffering’ is just
and-proper and there is no scope for enhancement under this
565%
9. As Rs.11,200/– awarded towards ‘medical
expenses’ is based on medical bills produced by the clairnaizt,
the same is just and proper and there is
enhancement under this head.
10. The claimant was treatedas lforbtwottdjays ” it
on two spells. Considering the natpuredof iii’-juries ‘andduration
of treatment, Rs.2,000/- awarded ribunal towards
incidental expenses as ‘clo}aveyalr:ce,’ nourishment and
attendant charges’ there is no scope
for enhancerln_’en–.’t ‘ :1. “l
11. The student and awarding
coin.pensat§io’r1e»under head. ‘loss of income during laid up
the nature of injuries, disability as
lstated doctor and an amount of discomfort and
$
the claimant has to undergo in his future life
awarded by the Tribunal towards ‘loss of
amenities’ is just and proper and there is no scope for
enhancement under this head.
13. The claimant is aged about 19 years .
accident and he is a student of
notional income is taken at Rs.l5,000′,’/A–
multiplier applicable to his age ” if
that he has suffered disability Q’.°-“”l.,5’~3./()lV”*’.f§’._> the”whol§e body.
Therefore, the ‘loss of out to
Rs/10,500/~ [l5,000x.:lV5-,/ pp 0’
14. is l._lentitled for the following
compensation; =
a) Pain and “sufferings — Rs. 35,000
, b) Medical expenses _ – Rs. 11,200
°’c) l’ncident”al expenses » Rs. 2,000
‘d,)’Lossv,oi7anien_ities « Rs. 25,000
-L::1ssv.of..future income ~ Rs. 40,500
ATTOTAL « Rs.1, 13,700
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part. The
., award passed by the Tribunal is modified to
ltheplextent stated herein above. The claimant is entitled for a
W
total compensation of Rs.1,13,’700/– as against Rs.72,2_O0/~
awarded by the Tribunai with interest at 6% p.a.
enhanced compensation of Rs.41,500/– from the date ”
petition till the date of realisation.
16. The Insurance Company is to
enhanced compensation arnoundt-.._§:t’;q*ith interest ‘two
months from the date of receipt of
17. Out of the enhanced 50% of the
amount with propor’tidnjate to be invested
in fixed deposit in any Nationalised
Bank/Schedttledd period of 3 years with
an option to “time and withdraw interest
accrued on it periodivcailhy. Atileniaining 50% with proportionate
inVtere’st_i’s’ Vordered.p_ to bewreleased in favour of the claimant
-‘deposit.
18; as to costs.
Sdfa
Iudgig