High Court Karnataka High Court

K B Shekarappa vs The New India Assurance Co Ltd on 26 November, 2010

Karnataka High Court
K B Shekarappa vs The New India Assurance Co Ltd on 26 November, 2010
Author: B.Sreenivase Gowda
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 26%! DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2910
BEFORE  T

TI-IE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.SREENIVASE. 

Miscellaneous First Appeal No;   2 ' dd

BETWEEN

Sri. K B Shekarappa,

S/o. K Basappa,

Aged 54 Years,

Oec: Post Master, _ --.  ;

R/0. Kadaranayakanaha.11y,°j"V  _ H _
Harihara Taluk, V Davariagere"D.1s_t1'ict...   '

... Appellant
   Adv.)

AND!
1. The IVrd1diua.Ass:uranee Co. Ltd.,
5 'Vali Complex, Shimoga Road,
"  H_s;1*iI_1ar, Daxzangere District
Represented by its Branch Manager.

   Ramulu,

' S / 0}' eVei1kanna,
 Aged about 41 Years,
R/':0. Kadaranayakanahally,
Harihara Taluk.

   Davangere District.

 Respondents

(By Sn’. 8 V Hegde Mulkhand, Adv. for R. 1,
R.2–notice dispensed with V/O. dt: 20.08.10]

65:

This MFA is filed U/ S 173(1) of MV Act against the
Judgment and award dated:25.04.09 passed in MVC
No.i73/ 2003 on the file of Civil Judge [Sr.L’~r_1.) 8:
Member, MACT, Harihar, partly allowing the»~_e}aim
petition for compensation and seeking enhaneernént”~of
corrlpensation. :’ ” .;.

This appeal coming on forWHeariii1g;'”th_is”‘day., the

Court, delivered the following:

JUnoMENrp

This appeal is by’ therefor erihaneernent of
compensation awarded 3i’ri.b_iinat._

2. Heard.-.. 2 * it

3. ‘Co’:nven.ience parties are referred to
as they are refer”i5ed’to:’in””the claim petition before the

Tribunal. ”

Brievfgfactsiofthe case are:

i 1 when the claimant was going on

his motorcycle to his native piaee at Davanagere, near

gKama}a:pura gate on Nandigudi road, a motor cycle

bearing registration No.KA-i7/R3443 came in a rash

V. negligent manner and dashed against his motor

9;’.

cycle. As a result, the claimant fell down and sustained
injuries. Hence, he filed a claim petition before the
MACT, Harihar, seeking compensation of Rs. l,OC)__,0O0/–

The Tribunal by impugned judgment and aWar”d_:’has

awarded compensation of Rs.30,000/–

6% p.a. Aggrieved by the quantum of

awarded by the Tribunal the «.

seeking enhancement of compensation; it

5. As there is no…disp.u’te’A Vcregarding ‘occurrence of

accident, negligence insurer of the

offendii1g.,yehicie3,ww.the that remains for my
consideration: is:

dlwfhethéer ” the quantum of
compensation”-awarded by the Tribunal is

just and.__p_roper or does it call for
enhatncement?

1 the learned Counsel for the parties

and the award of the Tribunal, I am of the

xviewzthat the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is

it ‘llyrxotijust and proper, it is on the lower side and therefore

” is deserved to be enhanced.

7. The claimant has sustained the following injuries:

Fracture of radius and ulna of left fore arm.

Injuries sustained by him are evident

wound certificate -~ Ex.P.5, discharge

disability certificate — Ex.P.8, x-rayg films? ‘V .

and supported by oral evidervice of ..
doctor examined as P.Ws.’l:__and
P.W.2 — doctor has stated e\(idencc..t_hati§c1aimant

has suffered disability to upper limb.

8. if justvifieid in awarding global
compensation ~« instead of awarding

compensation under different heads.

‘ 9;, %30ns.idering”””the nature of injuries, a sum of

awarded towards pain and suffering.

lA(3’=..__ Clairriant has not produced medical bills

regarding amount spent towards treatment. He was

fntreated as inpatient from 22-2-03 to 10-3-03 for a

” “period of 18 days in Bapuji Heaith Centre, Davangere.

fig),

Considering the same, a sum of Rs.10,000/– is awarded
towards medical and incidental expenses such as

conveyance, nourishment and attendant char_ge,s’.’ ~

11. Claimant was working as a gPost.E\/l’asterland.V

he is retired. He has not produced’ certificate

rd’

regarding quantum salarylV_he_wasC’gettingC.:at§ti41e…tih1e or.

accident and leave certificate”regarding”nature of leave
and number of of for treatment.

Considering, for 18 days
and he treatment for a
periodwof Rs.8,000/w is awarded
towards loss laid up period.

12,5′ “Claimant after sustaining injuries, continued his

and there is no loss of employment.

has to bear with the disability stated

bykthevipdoctor at 35% to upper limb and as to whole

‘body it comes to 11%. in addition to certain amount of

Ciidiscdomfort and unhappiness which he has to undergo

it Wfor the rest of his life. Considering the same, a sum of

E5

Rs.25,000/– is awarded towards loss of amenities,

disability and future unhappiness.

13. Thus the claimant is entitled for

compensation:

1) Pain and suffering

2) Medical and incidental . A .

expenses ” p v1dG;OO’0/~

3) Towards loss of income V _ –

during laid up p_e_ri0d_ 3,000/~
4] Towards loss of arr1en_it.ie’s_ Rs. 25,000 / —

73,000/~

14. allowed in part and the
Judgmentlratidigaiwardaotl th’e”Twrihunal is modified to the
extentpstatedvi The claimant is entitled for

a total itTeoIripe1′;:sa~tion’7 of Rs.’/3,000/– as against

~ awar-uee’d by the Tribunal with interest at

enhanced compensation of Rs/£3,000 /-

date of claim petition till the date of

‘ realisation.

The Insurance Co. is directed to deposit the

“enhanced compensation amount with interest within

i-‘is

two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this

judgment.

16. Considering, claimant is a retired

he has facility of pension, entire edriipertsdatitrn ‘is it

ordered to be released in his fa\3’QuI5f ~ ‘;

N0 order as to costs.