High Court Karnataka High Court

Chennarayappa S/O … vs N Rajanna S/O Chikkarasimaiah on 8 March, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Chennarayappa S/O … vs N Rajanna S/O Chikkarasimaiah on 8 March, 2010
Author: K.Sreedhar Rao Gowda
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKAHAT aANg3_A LORE;.. "A« '3

DATED THIS THE 8*" DAY OF MARCH,   

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E€;.SREtzEDH#{RS RAO "  

AN'E>.:'=..
THE HON'BLE MR. 2uSjfIcE,..A';'NA'."yEN-OGC)RALR GOWOA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRS1?'A;5::*£,9ALE§i'OV.--6»32o_/2004 (MV)

BETWEEN:

Chennarayappa--,1'.;__ 3 V
S/0. Ch'i'kf<"a'na:rasin'iEiaiai'2.,,"-
Aged anbou_t-48";+ear'S,. "  __
Residingéat .Kaiava~ragfam"s,,, 
Chickabaiiapur Taiuk.' .  é
 "     :/APPELLANT
(By  S,Vishv"va_nath, Adv.)

, S,-*0. Cfi.i_kkarasimaiah,
-D/_3ajQr,~ Y§§..i<agere viilage post,
Chickabaiiapu ra Tafuk,

 AA Koiar. District.

'A    Divisionai Manager,

 Nationai Insurance Company Ltd.,
 [)0 V, No.72, Mission Road,
Bangaiore --~ 563 027.
:RESPONDENTS

(By Sri i<.N. Srinivas, Adv. for R2;

R1 Served)

This appeal is filed under Section 173(1)

against the Judgment and award dated 26.05.2003f;p.ai’ssed~~.

in MVC NOJ996/2002 on the file Of the XVI.-,,’A’ddl.,V’};i’dg’e’,–,
Member, MACT, Court of Small causes, Ban..g_a:l’oreV..(‘SCCH4

14), partly allowing the claim petition for co’inpens_a;tio’n

and seeking enhancement of comlpensation’.._ ‘ *

This appeal coming, on fo-rl”‘Vheari,n.g..:thisv’–.day,’=,

SREEDHAR RAG J., delivered .th’e,V’follo’v*.riVng.:_

V

1 1.;

Appellant)’ ,__peti.ti’o’nei?’: svust:a_i_neVcl tfro”c’hontric fracture

of right le.g–,:”»fr_atE:_t.u;’re~ o:f__’_1sa.cro«~ilfiac foint, fracture of both

bones; of t_jairn’i motor vehicle accident. The
occurrence of the’ %iCr.iVde:n’t«,””negligence of the driver of the

offending veh,icie7and- insurance coverage of the offending

ve”nicle”fis’Vin.ot in Appeal is filed by the petitioner

see-el<incrievnhanpcement of compensation.

it 3 Appellant was working as a Supervisor in a

it Alpirivateii company. His income is assessed at Rs.3,000/~

Doctor has assessed limb disability at 80%. The

'total body disability is assessed at 25%. Income loss

proportionate to disability would be Rs.750/– p.m. Total

iv}

loss of future earnings due to disability woui.d:'–_:""e.e

Rs.1,17,000/– (750 x 12 x 13). AppellanttflisV-a:ii\i.a'rde§'dA"

Rs.50,000/– for pain and agony;-J'F?;s;–2S,C!i)0Z;jioérxwloésis it

amenities and future discomfort,

of income during laid up peri'0cd';.._p»Appellant; ti'~ea'ted": at at

Government hospital;–;._ N.o'rie.tftie'1'e»ss, is} granted
Rs.10,000/~ towards "4'rrie_=dica.la'd%fiif?'iI'i'tienta| expenses.
Appeilant in However, the
Tribunal has of Rs.2,88,600/~.

Hence, appe’|’i’a.’nt5s:’cila’inj’fo__r erahancement is rejected. The
appeal stands d’ésrri’i.s’sed~-éccordingly.

Ed/-5
EEEEGE

Sd/-

TUDGE

u”, sac*