High Court Karnataka High Court

Ahmed Pasha vs Yalahkigowda on 4 June, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Ahmed Pasha vs Yalahkigowda on 4 June, 2008
Author: Manjula Chellur K.N.Keshavanarayana
2. UNYFED INDIA ENSURANCE C0. LTD',
VINOBA ROAD,
MYSORE.

REPRESENTED BY ETS MANAGER 
  

(R-1 DELETED. R-2 AND 23 SER\s'E3'i})

'EH13 MFA IS FILED U/S 33(1) OF MY ACF"?aG:rA£NE*F THE} 
JUDGMENT AND AWARD I)ATEi3:6.2.:;g0(i3*--«.P53339213'-vz;N ':~.»m::v--w«
290.289/00 ON THE FILE} 012* THE} 1 ADQL. my A:xi:;...pRL.;»'"e;::v§;..
JUDGE (SR.E)N.), MYSORE, PARTLY ALLcwING"TH~E «.<:LAm=._
PETITIGN FGR C28-MPENSATIGN AI'€'D.___SEEKi_N"G E?J'H'z'§P1QEM_3EN1' 

09' COMPENSATION.

'THES M.F'.A. COMiNG,--{)N :.°§~::E:£a;§::~:<:}"'BE.:*a::i2E THE
comm' TEES DAY, K,N.KESI£a_VANAR.&3fl%§F.fg%,._Ji;._QELEVERED THE
FOLLOWENG:     .  

The c1ai1:12iiit i;1:'Eiéi\!C"N§:§_§'28§./V2-Q80 cm the me of the
CUM & 'i1i"za,}§)pe9.«}{_"'1§éef;bre this C9131': séeking
enhancenxeni -- of cemggéfi  ~ .  .-~

2. T113 afii3fifi&E1t'- f"1'1e€i"  the 31331:; petitim": in MVC

N-5.1239 v.bei'fQre '{hé'"TVribu:1al seeking compensation of

Rs..5V;5S,.QG'Gf}'~f%G1* :1'i1§§:_i..per*sona} injuries sustained by him in a

 vjrnator véhici¢.+a.r:§:§;{£€:1t that occuwezi at abimt 12.00 noon an

' " QQQGO fzeai' Puiikeshi Road Junction, Mysore. Ac:€:Qrd;i::'1g

 '~._'V.'i:,r:'tfi€-..$.p;_*élia11t, an 26.2.2000 at about 12.15 hours, he after

' - _ n5 

 



3

parking his auto zickshaw bearing §;'30.KA~€)9 26 16 11€31'

Pulikeshi Road j'E.1I1C1'.iGI1 had gone for answering tthéf 

cal}. After' answering the nature gall wherz l'1§:: _w'as L%i_tf€3:34si3.i.g«  ' 

tha road :0 go near his parkficl auto   

i'$o.MYU 7565 came at a high speed Ci1'f*s'§f1'--b3'  

rash and r1egIige1:a.t manner afld    as 3.
result 01" which 13.6 fel}. down  éxead and
other parts Of the bgdy. Ififas shified ':10
K.R.Hc}spita},    V'  irxpatient from
26.2.2000 to 2$.€3.,a.f3é.. offbést treaixnent, he has
suffered fifiéééng hi$ future earifing
capacity.  fithéiffi. befare tha accidezlt he
wsgg an 3.14.':-;.j'£'.<}*  étaifiing R3300/~ per day: With

ti1::*:se ca1i'tcfi'%i§Qn§s'.~._the appeflazlt: <:1ai111€:d tetai c01npensatior3

 of RS.':t,5'5_,'QQ'{};Vf' e,'fifigdéf various heads.

V _ 3. The petiiion as against. the £§.riveI' 0f the

__.i0I'f":§'.WhO was implaaded as R€3p{)'fld61"1f; Nix} cams

 bi: éiisiiiigsed as 110: pressed The QW3.'1€I' and the irzszzrer of

 V  é'fl'%:11diI::g vehicle appeared bef'<:;:"e the Tribunal Eifld

 



5
1'epreseI1ted. We have heard the Eeartned camnsei aggéafifig

on both sides.

5. Under these circumstances, the 1::<3i11_1:~"€.I"1:3i;i:.v a'i'~i:$:i* f0;4'  'V

our zzonsiderafiexl is, 'whether the agpei-lzssfifit &is'cétItit1:ég:1A___fa3:'A

enhancemmat of comperisation?'  _V

6. Perusal of the I'end€:1ts. The Tribmaai
has rccorzietti:'agfinfiiizéé?;§ig*§%;;flf§§f;'jggccidfiat was due: to the rash
and I1t")g1ig;x"."2i'"'§'f._ dI'i'£1"'Viji'}:#g  cf2f' fi1A€i'  in question by its driver. The

<5'w_I1éi-.Véi§1dE" inSMt::fer 01' the offerzding vehicla have not

 chaiieggeaé' %V%4::«.§;;3k:r;g ygcorded by me Tribunal in this

 i"é'g;ard. "FheI:_éfi:;ré, theirs is no need to go inta this aspect of

' '-Iiiatfjgr irifiéstail. The liabiiity cf the izxslxred to iildemnify

 in respect Gf tha Ciaim of the appeiiant is also not

  &



6

7. As CO1l}d too 366:; $0111 the judglnont 

the: Tribunal has awarded the compensation u1ie:?._orvj§'afious..'o V' 

heads as under:

1.

Compotisation towards Injury, T. .. ‘ ‘
Pair; & Suffering: ” _ i'{::.« ?’1..§,'{;_¥’O**Z3,! ~–‘

2. Compensation towards loss of _
Income during the Laid up period…

for three months at the I’at€. . : L’ -._ ,
ofR:.~3.1,5OO/– par month ‘ * L RS; _ 4,508/-

3. Compensation towards ios$_’of’.V 1 ._
Amenitioo a2:1<ie1'}.ioj2;11e11?:'of"1if{: .' V-R3.' 1C*,G€}§,!»«

4. Conveyance 1,()()()[~

5. Food, nou1’ishmo11t~–&f–_aito11§ia::1t’—” ‘
charges for T}::.;§: }:i.;of:’%iod”»w?o1*1<§r1'o_' ._ ° _
the app<31la1°1t.;§f3.s Rs. 3,400/»=

6. Compensation toixzazfdo . _’
medical expenses ‘ ” __ RS. =22,QOOf«~
‘ ‘ , ” V’ Total Rs. 53,900/~

8. oroaoi” ..:%;Vi§1o1″§.::o. of P.W.2 Drjxbdul Rahoof

oiotaoiishos “whet; the appefiazat was broughi to the

hospital”‘TiI;1IfioEfiato{§: “after tho acoioorzi, $16 was found having

‘Tr_frVa<:t.uro 1o{" of hunaerus and immodiatoiy ho was

4. .g;{1:i*;i.'{I:£:é..4_ as’-.7 inpatient mid €116 fratzturo was treated

‘of=..oo:’1sof’af.éitii}oiy ‘of; applying POP. According to the Dooioz”, on

‘ P8? was romovod ano the fm£:1:ur<=: Was; fxod with

Tpiatos and screws and thoreaftor the appolfiant was

disehargad fmm the hespitai on 24.3.2800. Acztording tha

Dectefs evidence, after 3 months when he exami:.V1éLi."Lj'

appefiant, he noticed that the fracture haci

found the appeliant having a.troph}~* 0'f""left..

shaulder muscle, as a resuit of whAi’ ch ‘;’qze

peI*i3rthritis of iefi: shoulder. £0″-th¢Af)d:é’§g;fVVtifier6
was a limitation in the ftlrther
$tated that on 28.9.2002, appeliazlt,
he rzeticed €116 t1:;f..1I:ib§reIn€x1t and the
appefiant conic} §§;ij;oi’v:-: 90 degee against
183 dsgree fliI1t3r1’1a1 retatioa by 20
degree agaiifié’; i2siccorci’1I1g to {he Dactor, tlae

8.’pp€H€:1I”1?L disability ta an extant 530%
ofkiie: 25% as agaifist whale body.

Thefi. v.1_::’;:;v:A’5;<§ifi%}vfii.iV$f'.;§i)ss«exa1ninati0n to RW. 2.

9. A ‘–..4__V’I’h};;’a the medical evidence, it is mafiifestly

” “mat tiiefippeliazlt had suffered fracture eff ieft humerus

_ “aIi{EV_ti3,e’f3″acture was reducad by fixing platas” and screws and

‘1:£é{ Vra-?ayé ixapatieni; for neariy {me }Ii1(}11’E}.”1. Taking Ema

1%

aempensation 0f Rs..:’33,9{}O/- awaraieé by the “i’ribuI1a§_…__TE1e

anhafiml wxnpensatimri amount shafl izxtazfgsfjéét. T’
311111112X}. from the date of petiticm tifl
raspundmts are &§r*€c::ted ta d(f’,}’Z£i_’i§;§i axxragfi. ‘V
iogethm” with intertzsi; and costs EiS”é’§il.;;£i%!:f1_Va}){Vi’§’J%?: %i glrzt
wwks. The depeselted ‘the afifiefiant.

Ivfigfi