IN mm men COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE, %. V 'Q ~ T . DATED THIS 11-11: 25:11 DAY OF JUNE, 2093 % . " ' ;; f f PRESENT THE HUMBLE MRS. JUSTICE 4' ; _ j T THE HON'BLE W. JUSTICE msc. FIRST BETWEEN R' P. K 1;' . szo R s PP¢1.SA§§H§_IA YB 25 YEARS (By Sri : V 'G B1'£A'I' ) AND: % . V"'E;A»'ANAGAJYOT}ii'WV/O MANJUNATH ~ MAJOR ._ 1210, 2;2,=II CROSS, II STAGE, = A -KEG C€3LONY .._uBAsA.xv3e;sHARANAGAR BANGALORE " " " ' A~ : 1:1~2I>IA INSURANCE co LTD . L REGIOIGAL omen, " N0 25 MG. ROAD, BANGALORE BY rrs MANAGER . RESPONDENTS
V -(By Sri : U ABDUL KHADER FORR2)
ms ma IS FILED U/S 173(1) 0;’ MV ACT AGAI3\IS’l”fTIjI}*”2.4
NT AND AWARD DATED:29.5.03 PASSEI’J”‘!N;~MVC
NQ3626/(30 ON me ms or my. vn ADDL. MnmE12,> ‘
MACT-3, comm’ OF SMALL CAUSES, BANGA1.Q.RE,. (.’s’»(:\,_ -3)’ ~ .. ‘V
PARTLY ALLOWING mg CL_AIM._ PETI’I’iC¥N * .1f«’on;_
cowmsanon AND smxmei EmwIcEpmNTV “of ;
CUEJPENSATTON. é __ 2 V 2 _’ u
THIS MISC. FIRST APPEAL,
THIS DAY, NIANJULA J, THE
The appdlant. VVBgefo:’e me Tribunal
who ha come pf in respect
ofmoter 1.30 pm.
2. ‘fzfictfi fifths appeal are as under:
On ‘cf the mpeilantfclairnaxxt was pmccedm g
» avon cycle to West wlsen a car bem-mg no. KA-02-
‘–__’?9?’ 5 opposite direction dashed against him due to nab and
dfhfiie driver, as a result he smtaincd fracture of his mkic
_¢wl1ich’.4″¢aznié.AVt6′ reduced by open reduction with pm: and screws.
the claimant, inspitc ofthe best possible treatment, hc has
in Walking for long time, he cannot squa on Elm ground and he
AT T_ ” nasgmcuxay in riding the vahicic. With an this, 11¢ complains pezmammt
” disability which hampers not onty his day-to-day life but also his fimm:
prospects. With these avcrmcnts he sought for RS.20,00,900/»– as
compensation.
3. Rosponécnt no.1 owner mmaincd absent,
insurer filed objection statement.
4. According to the respondent aocident’
due to the rash and negligent driving ofthe
insurer is to be heid liable, it is terms” ax.1.éi=ooji:_xdit1:ms ‘ bf me %’
policy. Wifiz time zvezmgmsq mo,,_s§i:g1;; fora ‘dismiossyal of the
petition. ” {A
5. On of the doctm was
cxamm’ got marked. Ex.R-1 is the poiicy
” 4:6.” So far negligence, the Icamcd Judge after referring
V _ t o «sxgarked oofore ihe Tubunal having regmi to the comma
we charge sheeting the driver of the car, camc to
conciu_siox;v£’i&.1t was no contributozy nogligcnce of any sort on the
Vpafiof t.hoV__Ac«SIai1na11t and the accident occtmed due to negligence of me
};.f am car. So far as this finding of the Tribunal, we find no
K holpaillengo whatsoever forthcoming fiom the respondents.
7.’I11encomingtothequa11tumofcon1pcnsation,accordi11gtothc’
learned coinage} for the appellant, the amount of compensation both under
genera! and special damagw amounting te £23.82, 900/» is on the lowexj side
and he lays arms on the fact that the Tznibunal ought to have
compensation towards loss of eaming cmaeily, as such ~
the fact the appellant was an engineering; V’ V
accident. He also brougmt to our notice igaspiie Vc.f_Vxnafi V’§iVVVbr¢1ng._’
pieced before Com’! regarding the exam Vecfiyitf.eeVVVef v.’LVheV *
that he participated in many 7n1ter~miIeVV§e*«e§icket x;Vae*JchVceVeonte:1ded that
the Tzibtmal ought to have seeeifded losVsVVAofV V playing a
game like cricket of V V V V VV
3. On ‘e:;§i;+.».cores oz; the learned
counsel awmded by the Tribumi is
just and in emught on record and he seeks for
dasmissa: one A V
leave the evidence, bath oral and decnmexltary.
indicates that tifm appellant was ma engineering
Veemester when he met with the accident Em me year
2900. VVVVVi3Te ciosed birnalleofar frmture of xigxt mkte. He was
V VV * egmaeeg o1V:VVVVI7.7.2O0(). He was in-patient wpto 19.7.2090. Open redncfion
fer reducing the fracture with internal fixation of screws md
VV VV plate. Again in the menfl1 of November, 2%!) he was admitted to
V ” hospital as he was sufiemg from infection of the right ankle due to the
2’
implants. Because of the infection, me implants were removed. He was in
the hospital till 13.11.2900. With thcsa injuries and the line of
new we have to me what exactly is the disability with _
I injured is sufi’er’mg fiom. The doctor 4–am,% ‘ v
exam’med him later to assess his pennafignt AA
foliowing facts: . H A _
” Aatalgic gait, patient @5335 wish of;
6″ scar mark o11 fl:i<;:T La£e;a1i1agp¢¢:§¢f»'1ow¢r third of
Iight1egwhich.i_s tend5I_';~– Av A
3" am o11:=£!1e:xt:{,*€1ia'I§:iEié_bf,f1;¢:T ankle; and
ankle joint, over the
Iowa' em: of ma 'fiba;;a mallwli
Maxim sgats of 51:31: fog}
5' % is rmtricted in its terminal 20
,, A V V. I.fe§'§3es 512;; it is
_ _ figxion is restricted in its terminal 29 dcgees
= A ' vmndis
A ' EA-Eersion is rcstrictcd in its last 10 dcgrcas and is
Iraversienisrcstrictedandpaixnfiflitaitsimtlo
'degees;
No limb Iength disorepmcy; and
1 cm of calfmussle wasting compmved to left leg is prcscnt;
diaabilities 11: has sustained. In order to assess loss of fuam: prospfé:-tsj of
better job with good income, at least the: appellant ought to H
cietails of the companios to which he had appliod or
for having attended the ‘mtcrview to 8¢cil1T:’Ii3x’;~j0b. kk
before us. Apparently, the modical expofi
impediment to same job due to by 1zi;i:§v.V%T§§:e:ar¢; we ‘V L’
an: not inclined to award agay tovt.r’atcia.,I’osVs_o§of fixmre
11. Having mgaxd to:.ti1ev:.z1:2:§1:Jxf; in, mking into
consideration the tm mm of his
sensitive fracturc of right mkle, the
Tribunal .3y§arde€i ‘aioounts as compensation:
(at) IIljlf1'y'p§iIl Rs. 25,000!-
"(b) ;¢ss"¢f»éme:siaigs 10,000!-
10,000,'-
(dj 21900;-
~ .- _’ V (6) nourishment chargm 5,900/-
” during laid
” ‘up period 5,900,!-
Rs;82,90G/-
/5
Wefiz1dfl1athchasaJso1ostoneye2u”pzi1netimadtn’i11ghisacg¢iomic
career which would definitely cause him mental distuflmzos, but
no amount whatsoever was awarded towards £033 of ‘
year. As there is ostcomyciitis of the t1’gi-1;; u u
would continue to have some pa’m if he: _véée1ks
long hours, etc. Considering all these wot ‘az~e’of ‘the’ L’
Rs.20,000f- would be just and to the
award ofRs.82,€}00/~. _’ L ‘D V
Accordingly, tho appeaA1..is:T’a!1ooi;oV;l com, enhmcing
the compensation awarded by the
Tribunal. So far as vofivard, it stands
sdli
judge
‘\
gab.
3-9,696