High Court Karnataka High Court

Gurudutta Vilas Murkumbi vs The Divisional Controller Nwkrtc … on 27 January, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Gurudutta Vilas Murkumbi vs The Divisional Controller Nwkrtc … on 27 January, 2009
Author: V.Gopalagowda And Swamy
    «fay   MALLANAGOUDA FOR
 An.& .__

* '=1:)Isfr BELGAUM  RESPONDENT

. ! (By Sri 1vI.V.HiREMATH~Al3V FOR

11: rm man own? or % H
mcurr mxcn AT nmmm *

Dated 27th day of F- i % k

I-Icn’ble Hrdustiee ‘ ”

And ff &
Honfble Hr.Jusfj:¢~;9_
ni.r.A
In MFA No.’4i-;3:’E§i[A. j T %

GURUDATFA VILAS MIURKIJMBF
R10 280, SANTA SEHAVRGAI}
SHASTR_I_NAGAR
BELGAUMFA. ” V …APPELLANT

T _ ‘M/*s,.”A,’R–,PATIL ASSOCIATES-AI)V)

‘ms r)MsiQNAL CONTROLLER

A BELGAQM

M] 3. RAG Assocxmss-ADV)

In MFA No.27’? 1505:

Between:

NORTH WEST KARNATAKA ROAD

TRANSFORT conpomrrron
CENTRAL 099103

GOKUL ROAD

HUBLI j —

BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR .Ar=PI.+:LLANT

(By 821′: M.V.HlREMA’E’H~Ai)Yf~FD§’ f ..
M/s. mo ASS()HQ_IATE!!§~A:I)V)..V _

And

GURuDA1*rAiv1ms MuRKUTMBI~-,.–

R/O 2ao,sAN’m’32;:§fA =x=”e.o.x_u ”
SHASTRZIVNAGAR. M

BELGAUM % % …RESPONDEN’I’

(By Sn; Rffinnbf-ADV FOR R1
% R2 is $ERvE13_ ‘ ”

_; ” Sri A.:m.(ENKA’rEsH»A;Jv FOR R3)

-000-

are filed under Section 173(1) of

M.V.Ai*:t 1988 hginst the Judgmcnt & Award dated

L3/1/:zoo:%s% by the Add1.MAC’I’, Bemum, in

– » ‘1€4IVC.N¢cx, 2699/2002.

‘ “I’§.1.~::se MFAS. coming on for Admissin/hearing

the Court this day, upon hmring, Gopala

%% fqowda, J, delivered the following:-

i’a.a./–

reveals that the claimant had undergone opegaffibgs

thrice on 29-7-2002, 14-9«~2002 and 17-9-20’G2,’_~…’.._i

was an in-patient for more than three 11:1o1.1.’:.’-‘1s§’i..:.’:’.I*~VIii~’Va::1’i.g’t:f;L:” ~ ..

leg is amputated almost .’

the pain and suiferings he -.1335 ;

ordeal. With all these, su;n bf is
awarded by the Tfibui1a.f’for”–_paj.r§’. anf;1.A:”su_t’fe1’ings, which
is the max1m’ I)!-Schcdlxlc to

Section- I63-4Ai.9f award a sum

of Rs. 1,O0(3/”§”fOrA: sfipulated under

the same séhcgduie. .

8. not awarded any amount

fd’s§fé.1f(i’s _ V and mcidcntal charges

bills are produced. The Tribunal

_ K,__l&s2.t sigfit 9? fast that the claimant had undergone

Surgefies and he was in-patient for more than

Taking into consideration all these

V’ we award the maximum amount of Rs. 15,000]-

towards medical exmses and incidental charges even

in the absence of any mediml bills.

¥s~:/