High Court Karnataka High Court

Ayesha vs The Oriental Insurance Co Ltd on 16 September, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Ayesha vs The Oriental Insurance Co Ltd on 16 September, 2010
Author: N.K.Patil And K.Govindarajulu
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATED mas THE 16?" DAY OF SEPTEMBER. 2041.9'

:PRESEN'I':

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE  .  '  

AND

THE HON'BLE MKJUSTICE   V

M.F.A.No. 289'i*§)_"F 2005' ' 
Between:  V ' ' Iv 

Mrs. Ayesha,
W/0.T.P. Naseer," __ V   . 
Aged 34yea1"s,  é       
N0. 151,731 Cm'sas,'Ij_V._*;'_ 'V ' 2   ,
HSR Lay0ut,3Agar'a,, '
Bar1galore+.3.<1'~ .  " ' ' <:

V ' H h  V.fl:.....Appel1ant
{By Sri. M.J.   Advocates)
1;;  The  Ensurafice...(3o'., Ltd.,
gRepresentec1« by "its Manager,

2.2 1:,' {f1d1a'n§VI§it1;a1. Building,
C1ibb0 npe't NI.aiI1[iR0ad,

  Ban'gai'0re--2."e:'j_ 

 "r._P. Na"sc.e{~.._
' " A.K. Poku.

_ Ageclahout 43 years,
' Asehary'a Departmental Stores,
"N0. 152, HSR Layout,

.V  V'Aga.i'.a'



Bangalore--34. _ __
...... . Respondents

[By Sri. V. Narayanaswamy, Advocate for R1;
R-2 Served but unrepresented)

8!¢=l=**IB**

This MFA is filed U/S 173(1) of ‘MV7Ac:t –agai,n.st”the7
judgment and award dated: 21.0_9.2._0O..4 passed
No.3105/2002 on the file of the Judge, Co1_.1rt”vof S-mail
Causes and Member, MACT;C Bangalore, {SC’C1~lj-§}),,VV,::::a11’t1y~. ‘

allowing the claim petition fo’r-.,_gcE’ompensation _’_and seeking
enhancement of compensation. ” «. 7

This M.F.A. eomli*.g –fon,– V this day,
N.K. PATIL J , delivered the’foll.otving;_& ”

Vt    7:"   C   
  3'    enhancement of

compensationEvfiledi th’e~in1§pugned judgment and
award passed ‘ in MVC No.

3105/200u2«–..l;$y’v. Court of Small Causes and

g_MeI}:x’eer,_.gAv’MgotorA'”P1eeident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore,

(rsfcesga),«(‘jer§}:euna1′ for short).

.’ . V judgment and award, the Tribunal has

Va~..___4’v.awarde~d’u’a sum of Rs.1,38,800/- with interest at 6%

‘*:C_t’)’.a.Vl,C”f1fom the date of petition till the date of deposit as

the claim made by the appellant for a sum of

Rs.}2,50.000/–, on account of the injuries sustained by
her in the road traffic accidem. V l

3. in brief, the facts of the case are:

The appellant is claiming that. she was K 2

32 years at the time of the

running a bakery in the r1a_I£iex and stylelv-as”:._;”‘Ayesha ” ll

Bekary” and earning ‘per rno11th.VA..’l’hat at
about 0.30 hours, on’»»appellant was
returning bach along with her
husband in which was
driven car reached near
Kumbalagodu’ road, the driver of

the said drove-_ the in a rash and negligent

whileaverting head on collusion with a

“cotning’l’fro:n opposite direction, car went to the

r1g.ht’_ls1de_ road and dashed against the tree, due

wh1chl,’l’:. she sustained fracture, dislocation of right

“hl1P~idlslocatron of left shoulder, blunt Injury on

-«..ll:abldoIn1na1 cavity, collapse of left lung, fracture of rib.

%’7
u____”__M___,,,…»_

Immediately, she was shifted to Mallya hospital,–.after

initial treatment she was taken to North side

Bangaiore and thereafter to Manipal hospital’:Eangalorelf

where, she underwent treatmen’t””in~ICU

and taken treatment as inpatient

thereafter, follow up tI’CEllZ1″I”L._:’CTl’1’7!’.e. it the
injuries sustained bythee appellanft’in.the aeeident,
she has filed a claim under
section 166 of, against
the responcienjtswieild’ had come up
for corgsideraiienliii the..R”‘I’ribuna}. The Tribunal
after after assessing the orai

and doeumeiztaryisvitienee, has allowed the said claim

tin part andlllaiovarded a sum Rs.1,38,800/– as

l’eonipensation:-uinder different heads with interest at 6%

Q p.al.;._:fro_m~ thellldate of petition till the date of deposit.

Being zagtgrieved by the quantum of compensation

it by the Tribunal, the appellant has presented

this appeal, seeking enhancement of compensation.

£2

__; _W_______,,,,__,…._…_..l…t.

months and during the said period she might have

undergone pain and agony and spent reasonahiieié

amount towards conveyance and other.-,4″:incidenta’1_””a ”

charges. Further, in View of the.-injuries

the appellant, she has suffered.»’:’.pe’r;nanentA.

and the Doctor has assessed–v:,o:ti’1e to
the left upper iimb and_59’o ufhole t3ody.V§But ali
these aspects of the or
appreciated V . the H V’ awarding
compensatié3nt”::7i’he”‘i?rihiariaI’hasassessed the income at
Rs.3,0QU’/L’ just and proper and
we accept it the “regard to the facts and

eircurnsiancespp’ of the “case, we re–detem1ine the

“c.0mpensatien toiavards pain and suffering Rs.30,000/–

rasr.§2c,ooo/– and a sum of Rs.10,000/~

towards jof amenities of life.

6″.-r’The Tribunal has awarded a sum of

V’ — towards medical expenses, conveyance,

VA neiiiishing food and attendant charges, a sum of

AM