1
IN THE HIGH COURT 012 KARNATAj{{A AT .BANGAL()R]il
I)ATED-THIS THE 0a:"'" my 01? AUGUST 2010
.BE.F()RE " '
"mp: H()N'BLE«1MR. JUS'I'ICI1_:z_'1j2 ()2? 2 i)1's':Q}}IV*§~'
BETWEEN:
Ex)
. Sri.R.Sures;h, Aged 37 years,
S/0 Rama Naik. _
Kum. Sl1obh;.1 Bai, '
D/0 Ra1m21Nai!_<. '
Shiva
S/0 Rz11T'Ei '
All 21:'€:}'.c:s'i<i_ir1'g._,r at L:1;1kvkéippi1.nz111a1Iti*
B0okike1'1'=.P09,I, H0szidAu1f.gii'--Ta1L1k,
Chit1'a_tdL11'ga"Dis:r.ict; '
...APPELLANTS
V' . (&Bj,':r.jé1'iLPun{i..i&kai 'I'Vs«liWai'Vz1 Bhat, Adv.)
*S__ri SW'L1ifii'j/A((}()Wda, Major,
S/'Q Klfislltlai Gowda.
_R/0'Q{1at1'E.ers N0. l_{)6, 3"" Division,
Kudre mu c h,
"C~hickm.agz1l01'e District.
United India Irxsurzlnce Co. Ltd,
Branith Office, P.B.N0.i 14,
Crecent Court, K.M.R0z1cl,
{'0
Cltick1n:1gz1lure District,
Reptd. by its Brancsh Manager. ...RESP()NDENT.S'e._V
(By Sri.Rawe.esh Benni, Adv. for R-2,
Notice to R-1 dispensed with)
This M.e.A. is filed under fiectitm .t1;73(.:14}.g_3i=.pMv'«'Ac':
against the judgment and awarc! dated 22';tiA().()7ap2?1s$,ed in.."MVC
No.850/()5 on the file of I Ad(f]i_Ei()I1£1}'---D.iSl1"iCt Mtge', Mem.b'er,K
MACT. Dzikshilla Kannaclzt.'M'2u1gei()x*e__ pa1_1.l5:j a«£_I('1'w.ing the-V
claim petition for compensati_01i*gtébzi seek'i~n;;rV"eril1afi.f:e1hent of
compensation. " " "
This M.F.A. coming mt i?)'1'vattilnisveidija.this day, the Court
delivered the f()I§()'Wi11§:e'"' ' ' V
Thrspz1ptpe2ti'--i3"dj'.1eetedéagainst the judgment and award in
Ne.850/O5 .t%dg1ted 1:22. 10.07 011 the me of Motor Accidents
»C3ei__ms_ Tlfibétttiilt, D.K., M.angai()re. The appellants were the
Clpaimants he-«ftp-'e the Tribune} and the respondents are the owner
and ittstzsfel’ of the 0t’E’endi11g vehicle. There is no dispute. as to
thed’et_ccL:1′:*ence of the accident and the liability of the second
:’esp<):1de11t~Insurance compzmy to pay the compensation. The
K.
appellants have filed this appeal seeking enhamsement of
compensmion.
2. l have heard the learned C0nns€_l_ f()1*;the’
3. Learned Counsel. forlthelappellarttts \;vg)t1’ldllé:–é)n’ten’d that”
the deceased was the z=m.)the1*«..ttif’ a-1’ppella11ts”AA21ntl she was
working as a Coolie. Thereforef{l1e__.fI’1’ib11nal ought to have
notionaly t’ixe.d”‘hefr– in€;(>me–.’.~’as’~.Rs-§_’l–{.l()/failper day since the
appellants havelost her4s’eliviCes.rasgadnothel’ and 1/3″ should
have been’– decltlletefdtozttlllefdtlwe salary instead of 50% towards
her personal.. _expens_es;._ deceased was aged 50 years at the
tittjehof:.tvhe_’aceidlenvL …. The Tribunal ought to have awarded the
contpehsat.i_:5n._aee01*dingEy. Even the award of compensation
under other”eenventional heads is also on the lower side.
the other hand, the learnecl Counsel appearing for
l 2the– second resp0nde.nt-Insurance company has sought to justify
” “~E’l’1CjUdglTlC!1E and award passed by the Tribunal.
ls
4
5. I have carefully perused the evidence and other
n1ate:’iuls furnished by the learned Counsel for £hev.lp;n’t.E_es,
which is the part of the record of the Tr£buI1z1l,.ll_:$o'”ail$e__ftl?e”‘.
judgment and award impugned herein,”HThe 1na’te’r’ia–l§s .or”;=re.;:o1*d
clearly disclose that the claimant was1″‘w._d€p(i§itit:—stint or Rs.i,59,0o0/- with interest @ 6%
‘a.niii”svLi:i”it..l”from. the date. of the application till the date of
deposit the aforesaid 709 days. The amount as above
shall l§$”t1Cp()SlE6d within a period of eight weeks from the date
i’ of..i~eleeipt of a copy of this order. The claimants are entitled for
V ._.withdrawal of the aforesaid 21l”i}()i,il]E with accrued interest
thereon in equal pl'()p(.)(kl()i]. The Tribtinal directed to
a
(3
dismlrse {he said amount to the claimants ‘.-lccordingiv. N0-.__
COSIS.
$5.1