High Court Karnataka High Court

Master Akram S/O Md Umar vs Ameer Ehasan Ahmed on 28 May, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Master Akram S/O Md Umar vs Ameer Ehasan Ahmed on 28 May, 2008
Author: Anand Byrareddy
 

BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 23*" DAY. 01?     A

BEFORE?-   * 

THE H()N'BLE MR.  BYRAREDDY

_MIscELLAN}_3oU§  %7o1/2006 my

BETWEEN;   2  ?[j  j " %

1

  
   
Beiug*--Mis*mr ~_ '

4;   His 
Shah} _ ":9, W'

 APPELLANT

 <B[ysIuii%s1-ipulvsm-s:«i,Advoca:e)

Amcser Elmsazn Ahmed
S/0 Amacr Ahmed,
No.37, Isl Floor,

151 Main,

 



Vasazxlhnagan,
Bangalore - 560 052 .

2 TheNa|iuaul Insurance     V

I10. I, No.72, Mission Road,   ..
Unity Building Annexe, ,  "
BsmgaIore560027  . V _ V 
By its: Manager.   ._   
(By Shri : A M Venknlcfiflz;   _

This  Fiyfsl  filad uls 173(1) of
Motor VehicIos*Act  and award dated
I/9105   Qtflthe file of Mth Adfi. Civil
Judge, Merhbcg uf Small Causes, Mclropolilzm
Area, Bangalorg  allowing the claim petition
[hr compu;:salion'VandA 'émhanwernent of 

 This   W0i«1s ' First Appeal coming on fin henna" g

 V'  --. on':fliisi.day,'~--ti)c  the following: -

JUDGMENT

nu-. Counsel for the appelhmlimd the Counsel liar

2. The app:-Bani is befiue this Court chalhnghag the

award of compensaiim whereby in respect 111′ the clam by the

E:

appellant for ccmzpensalion in raspeut cf

suffered by him in 5: molar ace.-idanl have been

the: Tribunal and I! global ¢x)mpensaligm~t:I K 2

awarded wiuma warm in nu; scum;

wmplained that the Tfiam so the
several hcads have fitted
compensation due.

3.’ W11»: would point out than
hayi:§g”t’»:gm1i injusries and the seriousuaas oflhe

claimant who was a young boy of6 an the

suflismd a wlwic body tfisuhifity in the

un awuuni oflhe injuticss and on um fun of en,

ml sulfming uught to have been wtnpensalnd

$ua&&nfiflly. The uppellzmi having auflimd ihgeg. 1333.’ g

fiuclums,i1wuu£d be ifu subsimiiul human! of

mmpensalicmisgzantalmulerflwstdelaauiofpufmanl

Q

suifering and thus (‘manual would submit list it M

assessed in excess of Rs.4S,000/-.

disability which would plague two, he kt

ought to be «woumguimst am it
injuries anct ah; conccmed, they are
neither, the awcmd mpuaaent
1-neufical bills in support

uf um age Court ought to take judicial notice

” _ in be and henna 8 nominal

under the same in the light of the appellant _

t:bt..:hay§i1g:tisf1tisi:ul bills in suppmi ofthc same.

” S. Futther, the having left the appuliant disabled

an extent of 40% through his life, the potential towards his

Gaming capacity is thereby allbcted. This ought to be

@

-: 5 :-
compensated by adopting as national imtnne even tlaouglj the

appeliasat is not an earning member and Ihe.reI’un:

available basis to calculalx: any such loss or we

Even adupiing the least u

u subsumlial sum attributable ._

cumpuwd under lhc: ms yunleci.

for the l
wuuld to the ctmteulious of llw

appqiiaai. and wanna that the Tribunal in its genetusily

liul sum of Rs.65,000/–. Nutwilhslaading

flyé.–.i::Ajiir”éé§;;’V._a§2§i”‘ihe suffering that the young child may have

£heIiu:1lhnllhcchikiisc:flctxku*agewould

that the injuries though seemimgiy of a sauna’ s

..m are capable of healing better at am mm age and

‘therefuw, the Tribunal was wholly jusiified in awarding a sum

2:

of I£s.65,000l- fur want of a basis £3!’ 2 measure

larger sum and thcrefixre, there is no

7. In the nigh: ufthese

not wlmlly in cm): in luwing
regard to lhe age of the ghéna of the iajuay,
if the amount is mitlnsamul
under ¢=.,,1..;,,;, exceed the mnuunl
mm upon itself the

¢m:r¢:ise 0.’T “pw fible cumpfinsshfi under several

é that Ihqw were lhme serious frm:tm’es, a sum

H V pain and sulliating is not umuuamable.

deem [’11 {ha 3 sum of Rs.45,000/- he awatdad

5 the head uffiain and surr-mg.

8. Tuwunls loss uf amenities mania, on the astahiiahad

principle, having mgurd lo lhe penwmluge of tfixabilily from

m, wage

the whuae body. Keefimg lhis in mind, it would be

gra substantial sum is awarded under the ma

income. In other words, the clmman° ‘ V

the polenlial of better perfunnanoc ix} mg,

he be oumpcnsalud. In tha ofthis’ us”

Rs.60,000l– is an * F %

Then-lore, is bald
caiilled in a_ ‘ will: inlmmd at 6%

Sd/-s