as THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALQ}{ߤ 5 ~ .
Dated this the 28″‘ day oflamsary, 2009 7 VV
Before
ms I-ION’BLE MR Jvszzcs HUw%$miiA_T A
Between:
Mr Dayanand Nayak, 30 yrs
Sfo Sham Nayak
Rh) Kaiktmjalumane _ : –
Mame Grama, Ajelszarfi ‘ 2: A ‘
Karkaia’1’a1n.k 5: ~ ‘ _V
(By Sri K VA;ty’.*) ” .”
1 Fcdxic 3 Sfo John Menezeaa V ' 7
IRz’e;’1\«<iari;opia, Avmce Nz§§zid.;addu
S}§ii'«va,E Taluk ….. .. n
2 V ' ,.B1"an¢h._1\k§~.wm*gér .._
*–. {initial Iiiaiiai Iangsmf-'.mce Co Ltd
"Bf£mch P Udayavani Bldg.
I\r{a;x:ipa1~ ~ _ Respondenm
~ ; -Sn” P B Adv. for R2)
” , * _ ” Appeal is raw under 5.173(1) ofthe Meter Vehieles Act
in set asiée the judgment and award dated 21.4.2060 in MVC
T _:?90.r7s)00 by the mar, Kaxkala.
‘I’hisFirstAppeai cmlfmgenfororders thisday, the-Colzrtdelivered
B/_
K ‘ fhe following:
JUBGMENT
Appeal is by the claimant seeking enhancemcnt of H
awarded by the MAUI’, Karknla in MVC 199012960. « . ‘_
There is a delay of 50 days in ‘ g th£~.appaa_ ‘ }. is
condoned. During the deiay fof on the
On 22.3.2000 azt):1::a:iv2.45 :p;m’.» s=s;}1en’–:i;c,chin_1anf was travelling as a
pillien rider in Vchisfié 2&5 :::”§§§a”‘fi-an Byhu towards
Karkala, at that run; %%cg¢:e% 1<?;&éo J 8996 came in a rash
and .rn0tV1V*H cycle of the claimant due to
which claimaflfi” feii grievous injuries. Claiming
cempensaticn, petit§’4cS1t._:vVz*sra’s ;i1eav:i’;- was contested by the Insurance
ttha”~1;as’m “of”flie’Vpleadings, five issues were After
the accident was due to the negligence on the part
‘ VV ‘»….»of the of — KA 20 J 8996. Having so heid, it awarded a
. mmggensation ‘Rs. 1,09,940i- for the injuries and the disability wflemd with
‘i ” Being mt satisfied with the sane, claimant is Mfare this Court.
W,”
Heard the coimsel representing the parties.
It is seen, the claimant has sustained injury on the head, eye as§6’»as
well as on the shoulder. He was treated at KMC Hospital, ‘E? x ”
»- Discharge Summary issued by flue KMC Hospital reveals K
has sustained closed head injury with a :ei’- with
cerebral concussion, with right if] fracture.
The claimant was treatedas an Taking into
aeeozmt the head i1Ij%’_1″1’S”,’ Rs.55,0{30i~» which
appears to he mmiaémg awarded £340,090!-
towards chashgaessv He has also been awarded
Rs.I,79(}f~» food; for nourishment Rs.}.,200!-,
eonveyame ehargeset VRs..1V,5Ofl?=*v_ a1?ifl V1ls.1O,O0£}i- towarfi low of amenities.
appel1as:{*s’ee:21:seL claimant has not been awarded on the
1Vie’ad’loss’ef to disability. Injury is sufiered to the head and also it
_____is note£l.1.3jk’eihe claimant has not examined’ as to the pm-centage
Qf disabiliefi .. fiafirewser, it is deposed that there is 30% disability to the rigxt
= Veyejeané wiii not came in the way of his earnings.
_’ under the head pain and suffering since aheady claimant is
lexerlaitantly awarded, he could be awarded Rs.1S,800!- towards 2053 of
‘;3s_’*’/
amenities and ansther Rs.5,(}O0/- towards medical expenses.
come be awarded on the head disability strifered as 5: has A’
functions. Further, another Rs.5,0€i0f~ couidvhe’ mmg i’ie§s}’.ofi,,& V’
income ducting the period of treatment and am.
Thus, claimant Wonk} be entitied»tu..I_1s.25Q0f)_6?- I
has been awarded by the Trfbunai with 6% iti$ei’ié:stAfi9m?§.tiis ;ia:je-
tiil deposit. Insurer shall deposit the amoum of
ihisorder.