High Court Karnataka High Court

H B Nagaraj vs R Venkata Reddy on 23 November, 2010

Karnataka High Court
H B Nagaraj vs R Venkata Reddy on 23 November, 2010
Author: B.Sreenivase Gowda
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 23:19 BAY or NOVEMBER,Vl2'Q.¥._0
BEFORE M    A'

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE or 

Miscellaneous First Appealafi
BETWEEN O

H B Nagaraj. _

S/0. Halageri Basappa, _

Aged about 38 years} ~   ;, _    _

Jiraythi and Motor rewimrlirig work,' '  __ 
Alur Grama ,   .  '  T * 3  
DaVanagere"Ta1uK      

 A  Appellant
[By   G. P. Prakash, Ac1Vs.]
1. ; ' O.

" ' o.._Vemare-d-sly,
Aged about 50 years,

  _ Sri. Rameshwara,
 VT Ow'nerrv.of"Tipper Lorry,

" to X

 31~¢o1v1;c;:n Road,
* 43} Cross, MCC B Block.
"Da§vanagere.

 The Divisional Manager.
H The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.,

Divisional Office,

Thiluvalli Complex.

Davanagere -- 577 002.

 Respondents

%*

[By R. 1 — Served.

Sri. C. Shankar Redcly, Adv. for R2)

This MFA is filed U /S 173(1) of MVAC1; against-t.._the
Judgment and award dated: 16/O8/Vin

MVC No.349/ 2007 on the file of Add}. Sessions–.1;jt1§i’ge,s–.»
Fast Track Court–I, Davangere, part1y.v_’aIIov§*ing the
claim petition for compensation.” and’ “se_e,king

enhancement of compensation},

This appeal coming’ on for._Admission,:_this;

the Court, delivered the foiiovvingz .
J U 13 G M’ ‘
This appeal is the ‘vettasrm_an–t’A_’for’enhancement of

compensation ..awaréted€ the

2. is admitted and with the
consent”t1.~=3ar11eti’._Cotz;’nse1 appearing for the parties, it

np ‘for final disposal.

‘ sake of convenience parties are referred to

” referred to in the claim petition before the

Trrs.q”n;_a1.

AA 4:; Brief facts of the case are:

fig,

That on 14-1-07, when the claimant was
travelling in Gayathri bus bearing registrationg No.

KA–l6~«–B–3245 from Jagalur bus stand,

village, the Tipper lorry bearing

KA–l7–A–4545 came with :sl_peed’.y_ii14_’a: 7

negligent manner and dashed l’againsteytl1ev:bus.:’; As la,

result, the claimant 1 he filed
a claim petition be;for’e_gt’he seeking
compensation. of Tribunal by
impugned has awarded
interest at 6% p.a.
of compensation awarded by
the ‘i”ribun.al’ ” is in appeal seeking

Vefihaneernent’ ofeompensation.

thevre is no dispute regarding occurrence of

Vaocicieriti’ negligence and liability of the insurer of the

it ; offending vehicle. the only point that remains for my

llcolnsideration in the appeal is:

Whether the quantum of
compensation awarded by the Tribunal is

just and proper or does it call for
enhancement?

6. After hearing the learned Counsei for theifparties

and perusing the award of the Tribunal}.iiiiijarnftif

view that the compensation awarded

not just and proper, it is on the’:.10vv_er”iVside

it is deserved to be enhance:d;.,V_

7. The claimant injuries:

F ractureof upper:’end’V.cf:pbcifh’ of left leg and

0ther;siinp1e injuries. ..

.ivIr’1juri’es étrstained by”-hiin are evident from the
wourid ‘certificate. discharge card — Ex.P.6,

disa}_:)i1ity””ceI’tifiC–ate_:-¥’EX.P. 10, X–rays — EX.P.14 and 17,

ofzML’C”i3obk — Ex.P.15, case sheet — Ex.P.16

V by oral evidence of the claimant and two

d»Qctors.’e§:{i&n1ined as P.Ws. 1, 2 and 3 respectively.

” _§;w.2 — Dr. Ghanathe Madhukar, an Orthopaedic

‘vS_u:r’ge0n from C.G.Hospita1, Davangere, has stated in

gihis evidence that he examined the claimant. On

physical examination, he found tenderness, swelling

%.

present over left knee and ankle joint, range movements
restricted and painful of left knee joint. shortening of

left lower limb by 1/2 em., signs of

osteoarthritis present in left knee joint__an.d

joint. X««ray shows malunited f1jaetur_e’7o’f.__’tibiatanid

fibula of left leg and lumbar sporidjflosis

with retrolishthesis of onL’4– with
spondylosis. He claimant has got
30 to 35% diSabilivt}’-»..:._ ‘lorovsfisgv”examination, he
admits the claimant for
. .

.’ Nayak has stated in his
evideneéifpaot the claimant on 15-1-07 and

is»:suedll’the dis’abi_l_ity certificate marked at Ex.P. 10 and

‘ ;X4ray=v._Vfilrri.s:”‘taken taken on 16-10-07 is produced at

is also not the doctor who treated the

claimaij t.

Considering the nature of injuries, Rs.l5,000/-

“tgawarded by the Tribunal towards pain and suffering is

on the lower side and it is deserved to be enhanced and

I award Rs.40,000/– under this head.

9. Claimant was treated as inpatient Vat

C.G.Hospita1, Davangere, and he has not

document with regard to

treatment and hospital _eXper1<'ses'.=.

same, Rs.5,000/– awarded» the" irxfibiiniéii towards

medical and incide1ita1._ just proper and
there is no scope for enhanceniientfl ' 1 .,

10. C1aimani::jec.Iajrr;..s to”‘haife.:Vbeen-earnirlg Rs.6,000/–
per iriont-hidwdb-3;«doingvi._agric1iIture and motor rewinding
Work. ‘But not established by producing

Vd’ocument._ Therefore, income assessed by the

»A Rs.3,000/~—- per month is just and proper.

H injiiries suggest, that claimant might have

talétentirehst and treatment at least for four months.

2 Therefore, a sum of Rs.12,000/– is awarded towards

toss of income during laid up period as against

Rs.9,000/– awarded by the Tribunal.

%~

11. Considering nature of injuries, disability stated by
the doctor and an amount of discomfo.r”t._ and

unhappiness which he has to undergo in life,

R.s.l5,000/– awarded by the Tribuna1_.toward.s’~

amenities is on the lower side; and it is d’eserver.:l”tlo_be

enhanced by another andegli

20.000/- under this head. _ _ p

12. Claimant is ..years.l Multiplier
applicable to his ageH_gro_u irfivclome is assessed

at Rs.3,00Q”/§l’j.:per .l_P.:W:2′–~~’ildoctor has stated,

claim’ant’~.%7’s’ufl’ere’d ‘disability of 30 to 35%.
Accordingly, to whole body can be

taken at l’1*0f5/o. ..’.So;’v.fu”ture loss of income works out to

(I~”1s.”3′;’ClOO/– X 10/100 X 12 X15] and the

awarded by the Tribunal.

the claimant is entitled for the following

pp compensation:

1) Pain and suffering Rs. 40,000/–
2] Medical and incidental
expenses Rs. 5,000/ —

3] Towards loss of income
during laid up period Rs. l2,000/–

4) Towards loss of amenities Rs. 20,000/–

5) Future loss of income Rs. 54,0_OO/-

Total Rs.1,3ti1s»,V(3E'(;–s,/_7»”

14. Accordingly the appeal is allowed 3t’l’iel

Judgment and award of the is

extent stated herein above.4_Thet’cla’imant’its

a total compensation of against
Rs.98,000/~ aWard’ed_’fby interest at
6% p.a. on the enha.n.r:e_d. of Rs.33,000/–
from the_ till the date of

realisation,

15. is directed to deposit the

enhanced”compensation amount With interest Within

months frornlllthe date of receipt of a copy of this

.. it of the enhanced compensation 50% with

ttpproportionate interest is ordered to be invested in FD.

in any nationalized or scheduled Bank in the name of

the claimant for a period of 3 years and the remaining

‘€53;

amount with proportionate interest is ordered to be

released in his favour.

N0 order as to costs.

Mgn*