High Court Karnataka High Court

Kumari Ambika D/O … vs Veerendra S/O Somashekara Gowda on 29 November, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Kumari Ambika D/O … vs Veerendra S/O Somashekara Gowda on 29 November, 2010
Author: N.K.Patil And H.S.Kempanna
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019'

PRESENT

THE HONBLE MRJUSTICE N.K.pATI:}  *' 

AND  

THE HONBLE MR. JUsTICE'I:I;I.:3_;IAI\IN4x 

MFA NO8043 '='3_}3'~..20O'5"{I'\V/'I'~'fl   
BETWEEN:  A A E

KUMARI AMBIKA   _ ._

D /0 A.H.MARULASIDDAPPA;.

AGED ABOUT 29 Y7EARS.,~  _  ' -- I 

R/0 ANALAKoR.PAIIEXTENs1o_N, "   =
NEAR AGADIMU'I'E;"'SAGAR1TOWN.=. V ' 
SHIMOGA DI:S'i'I?1I--C"I';"3'..__   "  ' ...APPELLANT

[BY  



A A ,9    _____ .. e
 S/0_SOMA$HEI:ARA GOWDA,

  VILLAGE.
SORABA TALLIK. SHIMOGA DISTRICT,

A A _ [OWNER ANHDRIVER OF TEMPO
_    BEARING REGISTRATION
 No.KA--I5~M--616)

'  NATIONAL INSURANCE
 __'"COMPANY LIMITED,
 "SHIMOGA CITY, SHIMOGA.
"=.RI«:R.BY ITS BRANCH AGER. ...RESPONDENTS

2′: -s—–/'””‘>”w,_fiJ’y

5″

{BY SRI.M.RAM BHAT ADVOCATE FOR R1,
SR1 VISHWANATH S SHETTAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2} 10

THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION.§’173′{I}–.._QE___ _

MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWAR{) DATED»: .
27.05.2005 PASSED IN MVC NO.99/98 ON_–‘THEf~.FlLE<–QI-'__

THE CIVIL JUDGE [SR.DN.} & MEMBER. AMAC.T,"fl'3AGAR,
PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIi\ri,.- zPE?T1T1.ON
COMPENSATION AND SEEKING "«VEN,HANCEMENT "

COMPENSATION. ..

THIS APPEAL COMING OPll4l’Ft3i2_VHEARING’:TIEHS DAY.
N.K.PATIL J., DELIVERED.fI’HEpFOLlGOW'[NG:– L

‘ .,_ _ fJUD_GMEN’:!_’_’ » ” ‘ ~ ‘ _

This appeal by Out of the
impugned judand passed
in file Of the Civil Judge

[Sr.Dn.) & Sagar. The tribunal has

..award=edi_..l{S.,_84,O0Ov,/~..with interest @ 6% PA. from the

lvkdatel of till realisation as against the Claim of the

appellant_ it-}{S.4,80,000/~ for the injuries sustained

the traffic accident. The quantum Of award

heingéinadequate, the appellant presented this appeal.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant

claims to be a tailor by profession and was halefand

healthy prior to the accident. She

2.10.1997 at about 6.30 pm when she

relatives and friends was going

tempo trax bearing Regnt_,No.KA§’i

Shadambi Cross on NI-I4 auxrash’ negligent
manner dashed agairist _tl1e in which the
claimant was traVelling’.”‘»-:As”lrof which she

sustained fracturiefi–njury_, one; surgery and undergone

treatmentmforrvaviperiiod_:of.:lrnorelthan 45 days. It is the
Case of the has spent considerable

amount tgowalrcls rnedicallexpenses, nourishing food and

atten’darit’ charges. On account of the injuries

a claim petition under Section 166

_of .Act..’1’he tribunal after assessing oral and

“.docL1_men’tary evidence on record allowed the same in

l.l_gj_.plart’and awarded Rs.84,000/- with interest @ 6% RA.

1 under different heads for the injuries sustained in the

/;

/”

. ;

.5′ M”

,_”,..w..,m»

road traffic accident. Being dissatisfied with the

quantum of compensation, the appellant has pre,sented

this appeal seeking enhancement of compensa.tion’.».’_’V:- -I~

3. We have heard the

for the appellant and learn.ed…Vcourisel. for 2 L’

respondents.

4. The that occurrence of
the accidentllthe.re’s’u1tant._ treatment undergone
for rnofe alsolya surgery. The doctor
has assessed at 35% to 40% in respect of

Parti§’~”L1~1’1_r and’w.18 to 25% towards the whole

the facts and circumstances of

Athe~l’cas’eV’Tw,e reassess the whole body disability at 14%

to rf;.eet.._’th’e’:””ends of Justice. Further, she might have

lspenét Vtsufficient considerable amount towards

— nourishing food, conveyance and attendant charges and

“she should have also taken follow up treatment as per

xi

W___,i._,,…”_.w-»-1

the advise of the doctor. Due to the disability suffered

by the Claimant, she may not be able to Continuejhoer

profession as tailor as she was doing

accident. The multiplier that can be app_l.ie.d_:’is 0

the disability is fixed at 14% of the

note of the nature of injuries__ suffe.1_”e”c§ aifidl’
agony, discomforts and the disability shefihas to
bare throughout her lifezfshe compensation

under different heads as”u»n dert’ it
{1} pain and..s§’t1uffctfll18’v 1].” V WRs. 30,000
(2) Medicaliexpenses . Rs. 4,000

(3) Cor:yveyaneTe.i& P;ttend~a_nt’s charges Rs. 5,000
(4) Loss’-‘of-amenities ~ ‘ 7 Rs. 25,000
[5] Loss of futur’eV_ineorne___””« Rs. 72,576
(2400×1 2x 1s_x14/ 1.00} ‘

(6) Loss of ineorne ‘during treatment Rs. 7,200

5’. is entitled to Rs.1/13,776/– as

0 _against i._Rs,n84,000/– awarded by the tribunal. The

:e’n.ha_nce’d” compensation comes to Rs.59,776/– with

9%

,5 WWW» »»»»»»»» “7

interest @ 6% P.A. from the date of the petition till

realisation.

6. For the foregoing reasons, the appealis ”

in part. The impugned

27.05.2005 passed in MVC 5.lO4;..99/98,_l53fith:3v:’;T1jil11lna;l is f

hereby modified and the enhanced compensation comes

to Rs.59,776/– with tttttetesti-_@ “Pgvi’\;”fr0m the date of

the petition till realisation’;– If V

Th’e”~l.i.’2J1d lngresponderit/insurance company is
directedtol’ deposi-t7thefenhanced amount within a

period’ of?) \uyeel{s’i’r0m. date of receipt of the copy of

of the enhanced amount of

of the amount with accrued interest

shall be:”i1iv;ested in fixed deposit in any nationalised

fora period of 5 years renewable for another 5

–‘ The remaining 50% with accrued interest shall

” released in favotfi the appellant immediately.

/’ ,,,,,,,,,, «M

;/ ,.,__._..

Office to draw the award accordingly.

“2

brn