High Court Karnataka High Court

D G Hanumegowda vs Shaik Ali on 30 October, 2009

Karnataka High Court
D G Hanumegowda vs Shaik Ali on 30 October, 2009
Author: K.Sreedhar Rao Malimath
 

IN THE: HIGH' COURT OF KARNATAKA,  .
DATED THIS THE 30TH DAYHMQF  'SO09  "
PRESE$T:A i" :'   'W
THE HONBLE MR.  
 V A A ._ 
THE HON'BLEL1V'I.R.  MALIMATH
M.F.A.   
     '
SR1   '
AGE:  _ A '  
S /'O  (}11l\¥GA;i*E,'\N'U}VIA1x'1fI,

'R/AT C'/'Q,'«BYRA:~iéPA..__ --
JAVARAlAH«.COMPOIJI}.ID,
G.K_.V.K. POST; _  '
BANGALORE - 560065.

;' 'V _  _  ' APPELLANT

(EmSI:\/1fi'1'. SUGUI'v'A..R;'REDDY & VENKATESHA c., ADVS)

'   SE2!-S::?1A;1k ALL

 SV/~O._VSYED MOHAMMED HUSSAIN,
AGE: MAJOR.
A1; PUR POST.

AA  GOWRIBIDANUR TALUK.

 KOLAR DISTRICT.

. 1}' .'

  THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER.

NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
BRANCH AT NO. D.O.~ H,
PB. 2786. SATHI COMPLEX.



No.64. LALBAGH ROAD,
OLD MISSION ROAD.
BANGALORE.

3. SRI SYED MUNAVAR.
S / O. SYED AKBAR.
AGE: MAJOR,
R/AT NO. 4/75,
HUSSAIN SAE LANE,
DODDANIAVALL1. 
BANGALORE M 560004'.

4. M/SGLOBAL  .,
NO. 1 / I. 1\~'IEINISW}XNIA.I?PA'«C§A_F< 

IILSOOR','g_.'--  , _ 
BY ITS     .
OWNEROF SCOOTER'NG_KA-803-7893.

   _   RESPONDENTS
{BY SRI"GANCADEIAR SANGOLLI. ADVOCATE FOR R2]
{R1 8:, R3 NO'1'I"f3E_vI3ISPENvSED WITH)

{R4 SIEERVEDJ .    

TIIISMFAVIS  U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST
TIIE'JDjDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:29. I 1.03 PASSED IN
MVC :NO_2<I20/99 ---------- «ON THE FILE OF THE XVI ADDL.

 JUDGE,' MEMBER, MACT, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES,
 ' VBAINGALORIE '{«SCCH»I4] PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM
 PETI*I"ION, ffF.OR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING

'ENHAINCE':;»fIIENT OF COMPENSATION WITH INTEREST AT

1% 13:1' . 

 appeal is Coming On for OJ'dEf1'S this day.

  SREEDHAR RAO, J., deiivered the foilowingz

J U D G M E N T

I.A..No. I/2004 is aifowed. delay Of 65 days in f1’liIIg the

appeal is condoned.

4/

The petitioner sustained super condyler ‘riiglit

femur in the motor vehicle accident. doctor viheis.

assessed the total body dise1bility_ at-50%.’1lflhe”-;”)’e’ti:teioI’rer* is .

aged about 29 years and he -is a slrivllled wc:rlreVi’v:i_1f; gi;lanVi.tesi.i~

The petitioner has [)i’OC1LtC€(31.V.Vl’l’t’li.1_Vté showing
monthly salary at v’;’;’>:;.if’1<1..T'\*Jhici1 eppeai*s to be
excessive. The not filed. The
income of thepieititioneriis."ss'sess:edi..a_1:«Rs.5000/– pm. The
income would be Rs.'75O/V
E3.m.i' """ H V V 'D it

'v"The.'Qccurrence'oi:th:e..accident, negligence of the driver
of oflitendipng. the coverage of the insurance is
l ….. .. v

'Ondreéassessnient of the facts and evidence, the

'petitione1'.V–V'is entitled to Rs.50000/~ towards pain and agony;

Rs.'250'0.0/- is awarded towards loss of ameriities and

Adisc.o1ni'ort if any on account of disability. The petitioner

AA'-gvoiild have been out of employment for about 4 months.

uw'Rs.2O000/W is awarded towards loss of income during

treatment period. l\/1'edi.cai bills are produced for Rs.28000/~

09/

«'1

and odd. The petitioner is gramled

medical and ll1(?i.Cl€l1E.al expenses. IH"RE}.:";5O{'iI'1'COl}7lBJX."

lfllmonthsixl 7{muliipiier] = I 530:QO/ ~13 floss

of future income on account-of dislabillify. :"il1e_:pe_i;itio11er in'

all is entitled to a total conip.ensaiti0Ii"oi;:l_Re.2vS8OOO/– as
against Rs.81650/~ A H

011 the enhancecleonipeneeitionl interest, payable is
at 6% p.a. till payment. The
enhancedilplalyable to the petitioner
ii V"

is allowed in the terms
ir1dieeite<l'.?sif3oVVe..:V'V–. A S b

…..

JUDGE

sal-

}UDGE

G98?’