Anantha vs The Deputy Director on 4 April, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Anantha vs The Deputy Director on 4 April, 2008
Author: B.S.Patil
Mfa9240.{)6
1

IN THE HIGH coum' or !{.ARNATAI{A. AT _

DATED nus THE 4th DAY on  7     '-

BEFORE;  

1'!-IE HOWBLE MR_JUs?i?IG1§"B§s.i'a§T!?:?'  

 

MISCELLANEOUS mm? 1¢d.a24a;"1g_1;_g___<§_Mgrgm%
BETWEEN:  'V '  V

finantha,

Aged 21 years,   

S/0 Lakshmaiah,_  V

R/oA:rdu:rpurav,,  ._  V    ' 

Gafljalgud P03? T;§:~' V .    _V   

Arkalgud       

Hassan DiSi3.fiCfl__   ' _  ¢_   :A.PPELLAN'l'

(By  _ 
AND:

1. ; The Deputy Dvirecior,
._"  Gcvammcnt Insurance
. V  Déparmnent,
   Vccdhi,
 [13.=xtxg§iiofra:.E$60 O0 1.

2f  'I'hc~$i1ipérintcndent of Police,
Meier 'Traaspoxt Organisafion,
Bagugalorc---56O O01. : RESPONDENTS

  "--V'(h:Ey._'8f§!i.h§.Narayanappa, AGA)

This appeal is filed 11/s 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles; Act

  the Judgment and Award dated 17.03.2006 passed in
* MVC No.8264/ 2004 on the fiki of the XIX Add}. S(H, Member,

MACT, Metropolitan Anea, Bangalore (SCCI-I-17), partly
allowing the claim pciiiion for compcnsaiion and seeking
enhancement of compensatiozx.



Mfa9524G.O6
2

This Appeal coming on for hearing, this day,' "t1ie.._T(39u1't
delivered the following;  4' e ,   " ..

JUDGMENT

1. This is an appeal by ‘

enhancement of con1pensatio1:1.–.___

2. In an accide11t,« fhat q§;;”‘o7.12ii2oo4, the
claimant suffered when a jeep driven
in a rash the ciajmafit
while he Maixa Road at
shified to Sanjay
Gandhi -‘an inpatient for nearly 21 days
from He had sufiered fracture of

shasft femur ice’ ‘% %’

I claimed compensation by filmg a claim

166 of the Motor Vehicles. Act before the Motor

Aceidenie’ CIam1′ s Tribunai, Bangalore. The clam’ ant

himself as PW-1. I)r.Pra.kashappa was examined as

Exs.P.1 to 5 were pmduced and marked. The

zespondent contested the claim and examined one Witness.

6″

Mfa9240kO6
3

4. The claimant contended that he was working..fra;’ber

and was eam:;;:1g Rs.150]» per day. However,__as

did not produce any acceptable _exzidenee_–,’ “the: va1:;as» 1

taken his monthly salary at Rs.2,£;’j”-{)0/f’f.s .. d

by the claimant as PW-2 sta’?”ed–.._t;1atV
permanent disability. The 2 Eopixled that
when he examined he found that the
claimant had ‘alas limping whiie
walking and and flexioa of
heft knee assessed the permanent
disab:§§1;’t§dVas” at 18.6%. However, the
Tribuaalyhas amcaonaz disability at 12% and

keeping file ef the injmed ciaimant at the time of

aeefdefit Iband ‘£e»”b’e’V18 years, multiplier of 18 was adopted

future earnings was arrived at Rs.6=4,8{)0/«-

.{;2,_’:;o><_1;2.'%?3%.{_,:~<:::x3;s~:12). The same is maaded of to Rs.65,000/~.

An azaeaat of Rs.'7,500/- is awarded towards loss of earnings

A f_" the pexiod of txeatment. Another sum of Rs. 12,000] — is

Vdawarded towards medical expenses and other incidental

"charges. Towards pain and suflering, an amount of

Rs.30,0(}€}/- is awarded. Thus, in all a sum of Rs.}.,14,500/-

is awarded. Aggréeved by the inadequate compensation

E5"

Mfa92’40.06
4

awarded, the ciagimant has filed this appcaft .j§s;a§:’:z:ng

enhancement.

5. I have heanzl ktarned counselfof pa rt}

the evidence on record.

6. A1t11ougl:1 learned Cotitends that
the disability ought to 1_)ee11 ’18__.6% oo deposed by
the doctor, I do not fmdAAan$f ‘opproach adopted
by the disability at 12%.

The had suffered fiacttlm
of shaft of the doctor was on the
higher eide ‘So :§1s»ti:e_:’pe1*centage of disability compamd to

the Whole body_VisVr;€:noe:1téti. Therefore, the Tribunal was right

it down to 12%. However, as regards

Tribun.aJ. ought to have taken Rs.3,(}OO/– as

as the claimant was a young boy aged 18

years véas engaged as a barber working at Bangalore. If

A ftf”t1:1e”o.a1eu1ai:ion of loss of filture earnings is made taking the

irigonthly income at Rs.3,0()O/- the same will Work Q1111 to

” ‘”1és.77,76o/–.

16/

Mfa9C240 .06
5

‘7. The Txibunal has not awaxtieci any amount ‘loss

of future amenities. The evidence of the

discloses that the c1a1m’ ant had physagcaiii » ,4

as there was xestxiction of movement fof. iieft

knee. Therefore, towards losso–f_VaJneni1:iesVdue’£o ‘d_e;;riSIatiozi ”

of enjoyment of life, a sum 1 ‘deserves to be
awarded.

8. The has evidence that implants
inserted a sum of Rs.8,000/- is
requimd to ‘izfiatfl of the matter, I am. inclined

to Rs. medical expenses.

9. _ .TowaiiisV_:ioss.’–oi”eef1iings during the laid up period, the

has only Rs.’7,50()/–. At the rate of

if the loss of earaings for three months is

eomes to Rs.9,000/ – instead of Rs.7,500/ -.

3.0,,” In “all other respects, the amount awarded by the

, i is gust and reasonable and does not require any

‘ V. …_iizteIference.

11. In the result, the appeal is ailowed in part. The total

compensation to which the claimant is entitied is determined

6″

Mfa9240. 06
6

and fixed at Rs.1,56,’?60/- rounded of to Rs.1,56,?;3g):;;e.. The
chaimant is entitled for interest at 6% pa. on
amount from the date of petition till the datepf
enhanced amount shall be deposf§e&V ai ‘ b T
weeks from the date of receipt. 91′ a
claimant is also entitled for Vc’C5:’;’;: :t;’sr.of eum

Rs.3,000/-.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes:

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *