High Court Karnataka High Court

Andhra Pradesh State Road … vs Sri Paras Chand on 9 September, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Andhra Pradesh State Road … vs Sri Paras Chand on 9 September, 2008
Author: Subhash B.Adi
IR THE} H16}! CQURTX' Q? KARHATAKA AT BAHGALORE
DATED "¥'HIS THE 933 SAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2008

BEFORE

THE H€)N'BL-E MR.-JUSTICE suauasa a.Am:"    

M.F.A.NO.89 iél 2008 (MVC}–,

BETWEEN:

fandhra Pradesh Siam Roati

Transport Cerperafion,

Central office,

Mushirabad, Hyderabaai,

Andhra Pradesh, ” ‘ } _

Rep. byits Managfng Directar. — _ i =.I}~,,__.£tI3’f’E.1LI.,«ANT

(33% ‘Siis Vii5.33’3l€iin53f; A

AND:

Sri. Paras Chéénd; ” – .. ff ~

Sic. Late Moioi c:;::and,–“.,~.__” ”

Aged about 58″ye.*-zzrsg . V’

Rio. 140.128, 2mi._F1oo;~,

3″‘ Block, 41″ Stagig _

8asav&£;11W;1r’a.;1:aga1″, _ V V

….. …RF:SPONfiF3NT

T1:is*–V~M§i:’;,$:.;’jjig;Vffiga u,Is.:73g;.) Qf MV Am, against :11:

3:t1<flgemenf"* £2.11-ail. ';i€§*a1d dated 04.04.2008 pas:-aeé in MVC
"7§:::;5V1-:2;,f20Lie3,__¥:,»n the file of XIX Aédizdgnai SCJ & Member,
_ V_ .vVELé§.';ga19re, S€T{1H~1?, awarding a compcnsatiozi Qf
f';12s;.:T.;3i3,:2Qé;- with interest 6% pa. an }?.s.1.78,?.()0]–~ mm

. 'da*:eV0f petifion I311 érzpesit.

‘E’his appeal {taming on far 3d1I:3:f:ESi€}I1 this day, the Court

gisiivered tbs follewing:

actuai’ ._ the compensatien is awardsd at
TV ;-Ré.32,QQA(}’}’~~*. T{‘;w;eéAi”dA$ the mantra}. shack 311:1 agezmy R$.5,0{}0] – is
;}5»,0{)O/¢ is aarzarxisd tewards conveyance,
gharges and nmzrishmezat. RSK3_Q’€§{36!” is awaxfifid
future medical EIXPEIESES 233:1 1’~’~?s.1i2.(}(}{)]- is awardcci

«:.fitic.>1,*z»::%.i1’fis the laid u§ paziad.

JUDGMEKT

This appeal is by the Cerpcrati-an quesiiolzing the av,§:a;fd
dazed 4.4.2€)O8 in MVC No.6121/2066. T T

2. The respendezzt Claimant sustainfid ingury
accident on acceunt ref a rash and Iaegligezit
bus on 31.1.2905. On E-1C{‘,€}1I11§ sf ‘E116
alleged ‘that, he has suflergd»’l_§’iSabiiii3*.__
ceznpensation. H ‘

3. En $”é}.1}p0I’i of 13’s faxaszlizled as
F1131 33:53 aIs=::- E-X$.Pl to
P15. The é:¥,#§d;::¥E: found ‘that, the
claimaxzt. has cm tha left lewer limb
and for the wh§1’e4_ bo§§,?’gt. V incama {if thfl sslajmant is
tagcgn at ,.F~fé§.’4;z’}0(}/ “K and caiculatcd the same at

tbs f¥,1§13.I'{‘:’ loss of earnings” As against the

4: 552% ‘gijayakumar, leameé Cflilflsfil fer the appeliaxxt

Submittrad that, ence the bones am Lmitfid, the disability seized

évaiéj

siisabiss him frem C:-arzfizixzg his roufiizztz workfi The ifibunal has

taken mtg: cgnsideraiiusn tha magma at P;s.4,(}€)()!~ per moxlth

based on 1:115 fividffiiacfi ef the claimant. On ethzzr heads

no disputa that the tribunal has awaitieci

cempenaatimz.

6. E find that the cantentieza wised by tf%1_é’Eé*:za:*:;–e_€i .~::§:2:.;;1:=;:«?g5fr:11. 1

far the appaiiazzt that ‘(ha ~.,has 11<,}t V$1ifi'e1'";_Vd" 9.25;:

disability {:3 earns' 01: his mguiar ro1zt."£1%z._:fii:1g1§r..A_ a;3p¢éé,i£:=é1s ané same is dismissed.

t’§’}:1eTa1.;;.i21,;i:’:, §;q’d*s:pesit 12$ Lragzsfermd :0 the tribunal,

Sd/-

Iudge