This MFA is filed U/S. 173(1) of MV Act against
the judgment 8: award dated 27/ 5/ 2008 passed in
MVC l\Eo.1064/06 on the file of the I Addi. Civililudge
(Sr.Dn.) and Court of Addl. MACT. Chitradurg§1;c..paItly
allowing the claim petition for compensation 31
enhancement of corrliiensation. I ‘ »
This appeal coming on for V.
the Court, delivered the following: .
Junsmfinr
This appeal is seeking
enhancement of awarded by the
Tribunal.
2. Heai*d’fp_««..V 51- “The admitted and with the
consvent’of:ijearrifed Counsel”‘appearing for the parties, it
istakefijipibrhngfigfisgqsai
3,_§’ 0′ Brief factlsvlof the case are:
on 04.03.2006 when the claimant was
~. pi>§,vaiting’_”_forV~.:bus to go to Pandarahally Village on NH 13
hetween’ Chitradurga–Hola1kere road a motorcycle
0′ bearing registration No. KA 16 L 3531 came in a rash
negligent manner and dashed against him, as a
0 result he fell down and sustained injuries. Hence, he
fiied a ciaim petition before MACT, Chitradurga seeking
compensation of Rs.9,”/5,000/– and the Tribunal has
awarded compensation of Rs.-45,000/–
6°/0 p.a.
4. As there is no dispute ‘».regardiifig.. ‘occ11rre:1_c’e:; of
accident, negiigence theiiiiisureif ‘the’
offending vehicle the oriipf-..poi.;it refnains for
consideration is:
W_hether~ the §:;ompens.«§t1o§iatawarded by
the Ti*ib’i’o;xia]. is ju.st”‘a.ridj’e.ason§able or does it
ca11~for__enhance11ient?”
5. iearfied Counsel appearing for
the judgment and award of the
‘1’Ifi_b_una1′-»I ” 3.11}. 55 Vtiide View that the compensation
by the””‘i’r’ibuna1 is not just and reasonable, it
lower side and therefore it is deserved to be
i A efihanced.
6.’ .. As’ per wound certificate Ex. P 5 claimant has
,:s’u_stained subdural heamotoma in the Ieft occipital
convexity, fracture of occipitai bone on left side and
.-
posttraurnatie cerebral edema. Injuries sustained by
him are also evident from discharge cards 6 to
P 8, Outpatient cards Ex. P 9 to P 13, CT.&.S’eand:’1fepor”t
Ex. P 79, CT Scan films Ex. P 82 to P 83
by oral evidence of the c1aimar1’tii”exarni.ne.d He » 1′. it
was treated as inpatient ~D~ayange’re
for 15 days. He has not exaniined
disability. . d
7. Considering éftieniiarly fracture of
occipital Rs.30,000/– is
awarded tow’ards”‘paj’n’.’iand suffering.
8. by the Tribunal towards
medicaid”-«.Vexpenses, it based on the medical bills
claimant, there is no scope for
V eI1haz.1_oe,r”nent. under this head.
was inpatient in Bapuji Hospital,
Davangere for 15 days. Considering the same
_VRs.1O,00{)/– is awarded towards incidental expenses
%,.
renewable once in three years and remaining amount is
ordered to be released in favour of the claimant.
N0 order as to cost.
Vb/–