-1-
EN THE HEGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 31" may OF SANUARY 20Q9 =_W,
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.sREEDHAa RAc¥: .
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE s.N;sATYANARAyANA ':°
M.F.A. No.73é1f2oo3{Mvg * 7
BETWEEN
PARVATHAMMA KR:sHNA1Aa._w '
W/O H 3 KRISHNAERH ;; ,'}v..~,»_ v
go YEARS. R/A NQ;19,*12TH cRoss'"w*
CUBBONPET,*BANGR&QREw;, 2 ''*j _y
V --TT: " 'v* ';.. APPELLANT
1 N_N SUBRAMANYAH ""
VgsXe.s NANJUNDAPPA
§ NQn18r3f1,'5*§*cR0ss ------
«_ VEMATESHWARA LAYOUT
» "«aHARAmnRAM CGLLEGE POST
BA.N;;J§LQR%.::~42 9
2 _UNI€ED INDIA INSURANCE co LTD
:HIaD'pARTY CLAIMS OFFECE
- N0ai43 & léé, can CHAMBERS
'*»_: MAEN RGAD, SESHADRIPURAM
'BANGALaRE~29
" ... RESPONQENTS
f " (By 3:: : L SREEKANTA RAG, ABV. FOR R2 ;
THIS MFA IS FELED2 U/S 173(1) OF MVT ACT
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:25,2.G3
PASSED EN MVC NO.3072f9? ON THE FILE OF THE VII
RDDL. JUDGE & MEMBER, MACT-3, COURT OF rSMALL
CAUSES, BANGALORE, sccr; NO.3, PARTLY ALLQ5€1";:sI_G't.ij~;;E: V.
CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AN_E>a_ s'£_r:;'§::§:-:;._T't_
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL comma ow :"E"€3R«.,?aLjMISS:i'CN E1*1z%i:':é*;
my, m@za1z mo .7., DELIVEZRL-3_D $.53.:mLLQw:N<3:f-..___
guaai-@;_z_%
Notice to R1 di§pensed"witH?Vt
The appellant~pttit£bg;t flgtta passenger in
a bus. The" the 2nd
respondent§"to;iid§d:tgtthVVtée _§tter bus. As a
result, thékfietztitfiétiéuttgtéd 1033 of 8 teeth
and fxfictuié 5fffifiwtV The Tribunal has found that
the acctdéfit ¢Ctfitrééflté;lely’ on account of the
neglggenge bf thé éffending bus. The occurrence
ax adftiéccifiefitifl negligence of the driver of the
A®ffendLfigt”bfis§ and insurance coverage of the
offapding bgé not in dispute.
Butfhe evidence ef Sector discloses that an
[two “occasions .dressing was dame to metal arch
5%
path to the lower path. The face_ ofe fine”
petitioner is disfigured. Grafting wae done endj *
supra structures, ceramic fused”meta; orownstwereg
done. Bone grafting was refieated and treatnefite
continued for about 3 years. dfiespitegtreaement “V
looks is corrected to an efitent of t0%non;f. The
above injuries and *oonsegeenoedfaneents to only
disfigurement rand eoe§1;n§£_;¢§fi$eFfafiy permanent
disability: ifinfieb iCon1g neffeétwjavooation and
future income. g
3[j The’_oe£itionera_is a housewife. Her
notional ieoome to be assessed at Rs.2,100/- p.m.
._ On .reaseessmentg_of_ the facts and evidence, the
d} petit1Qneru_ in entitled to compensation of
§s.§QgOO$f¢_’for pain and agony, as against the
_ medi”ca.1.-._'”‘b-iiis produced for R3.2,52,450/- the
..””—-VV;§et.itione.r is granted Ra.2,’?5,GOO/-~ for medical
4″ and» incidental expenses and Re.50,000/~ for
d”*.§iefigurement. The petitioner cannot close her
iemouth comfortably. Hence Rs.50,0GO/– awarded for