High Court Karnataka High Court

Fakkirappa S/O Mallappa … vs Sri Hanumantappa S/O Budappa … on 16 February, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Fakkirappa S/O Mallappa … vs Sri Hanumantappa S/O Budappa … on 16 February, 2010
Author: A.S.Bopanna
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA H

CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD  H

DATED THIS THE 16'?" DAY OF FEBRII;A€£A1'lE'§Y'V,.v1'i2(:élfi§°£1:.é 

BEFORE... 

THE I-ION'BLE MR. JUS'r;ICE.'_A*."S. *1'-3(_')"I'.':I*'§}\§VV1\I':§=.j:VA _  

M.F.A. No}?'1..51o]"2O68AHH~--_  

1. FAKKIRAPPA S,f.4O'«.MA'_LL.}\.PPAvSIIMUDRANNAVAR
Aged about 50 Yێ3?_S', ' .     H' v
OCC: AGR_ICULTE..I.RIS'I",.. 
R/A YARAGUPZ?I VI}:;LA._G'E3'_j-. I
TQ KUNDg:1&OL,_D.IsT., D..H;AR'NAD.

     «A _  ...APPELLANT
(By SR1:*MALLII<A}?J'U.N-.I3.HIN1£MATH, ADV)
A_1:1..I;2   A  
1. sRIv.HANU'MAN'TA'pPA S/O BUDAPPA HOSALLI
AGE 'MAJOR, OcC"OwNER OF MAHINDRA TEMPO
 NO KA 26»/1770, R/O GUDENKATTI
  KIJNDGOL; DIST, DHARWAD.

I "«NjAT1O'NAI, INSURANCE CO LTD

IN..VHABRAT=I.cI;--1'OFFIcE: HUBLI CO OP COTTON

'  SALES SOCIETY BUILDING I-IUBLI, HAVING ITS

" Bi?ANCH OFFICE AT SUJATA COMPLEX HUBLI
BYITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER

 RESPONDENT(S)

VA …_.{By SR1 M.Y.KATAGI, SRI.S.K.KAYAKAI\/IATH,

ADVS FOR R2, R1 NOTICE DISPENSED WITH)

i

In

MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV AOT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 21/6 /2008″ Pj_§S.SED
IN MVC No. 162/2003 ON THE FILE OF THE.._P’R’Lh;e-‘CIVIL

JUDGE (SD) 35 ADDL. MACT,
ALLOWING THE CLAIM…..

COMPENSATION AND SEEKING,AENHANCEMENTAOF
COMPENSATION. ” ” ° ”

THIS APPEAL THIS
DAY, THE COURT FOLLOWING:

The enhancement of the
cOmpen.SatiOn sum awarded by the
Tribtinai Tribunal has awarded

the totaulx Se.Ompen__SatiO’n”-~’Of RS.35,0OO / —

d ‘aijleardtttttthe Eearned counsel for the parties

appeal papers.

” While awarding compensation the Tribunal

awarded compensation towards, pain and suffering,

H vfdisability, loss of earning during the treatment period

and under the head of medical expenses. Though the

A

Lu

learned counsel for the clairnar1t–appel1ant contends

that the Tribunal was not justified in recko~n_,ing~._the

disability as stated by the doctor, I am

accept the said contention sincethe Trjilounalf, has 1.

referred to this aspect of the

the document at EXP 6 ti’-i,:ef*cl_isat>.ili.t_y’ cgertificate issued’ V

by the doctor who note-treated-»,the and the
same was issued afterha’ time, though the
accident In that light,
even be considered the fact
thattthe produced before the
Tribunal and the claimant had suffered the

injuries eds» indicated therein cannot be disputed. If this

Aa’s;.)i:ec–tii. keipti iiiii View, there is short fall of

as awarded under the head pain and

suffer_i..ri~g_ also the loss of amenities. Hence, keeping

xthisuaspect in View and also to take care of some

if towards the discomfort suffered during the

* ‘recovery, in all a global enhancement Rs.20,000/– with

interest would meet the ends of justice. Accordingly,

i

the compensation is enhanced by a sum of Rs.2.0,000/–

plus interest at the same rate as awarded_::’-by-..Vvthe

Tribunal in addition to compensation

The enhanced amount with initercst V’d’c1;_”_>Qsite’d’s.

by the Insurance Company wi’thin_’da pe1<iod.–:ofu

from the date of receipt of of this
In terms of thedabovfde, stands disposed

r sa/*
dddd 313963