-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA B.i§NCH__
AT DHARWAD . " «.
DATED THIS THE o7u$JoAfi('o%F';AUoij_$r,
_ BEF' O.R»E--._A. 'V ' V'
THE HON'BLE Mf§S;v~ve;1f:"USTIC"E'*B§_V;D§A(§}qéHTHNA
BETWEEN: %
Kanakcrti B2;Sava1a_j',WS/'oi:
Rangappa', Aged ._
Agliculfililifiti _ V
H.B.H£'J]i 'Kojak, A_
_ % % .... ..APPELLAN'I'
(By Sxi Ready, Adv.)
Sn" 8/0
1.': Shaxeefilddin, 'I';B; Dam Road,
. " . _ Q Hos"p:et,_Be_lv1.a1y Distrkzt.
Assurance Co.Ltd.,
By its D;rgvis'1on' al Manager,
101.
.... . . RESPONDENTS
.. ” ‘(Hy si~.LG.N.Ra1’chux, Adv. For R2)
This MFA is filed under Seciton 173(1) of the Act
against the Judgment and Award dated 6.12.2005 passed in
MVC.No.246/1993 on the tile of the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn) as
JMFC Cum Member, MACT-IV, Hospet, partly the
claim petition for compensation and seeking enhancement of
compensation.
-2-
This MFA comm” g on for Anwsslozi lithe
court delivered the following: _. ~
J U D elm E}. 11- ‘
Though this ‘listed tea: with the
consent of both sides disposed of
2. _ as era’ imant being aggrieved by
the ‘- in MVC.No.246/ 1993
dam 5; iby, Hospet.
‘I’he vfaacts of the case are that on 16.10.1992
2 A st .sboutVi6,30p.m the claimant along with his friend were
._ a moped to their village’ Mutaganahalli from
when they came near their village at that time, a
~ : No.KA-35 M 187 driven by the first respondent
in a high speed and in a rash and negligent manner
and hit the moped. As a result of the accident the claimant
suffered fracture of his hip region and other injuries. He was
shifted to Government Hospital, H.B.Halli when: he was
/4″
_ 3-
treated for ten days. Contendjng that he V.V1::a;:i~.._become
permanently disabled, he filed the claim. seezging
compensation on Various heads.
4. 011 service of notice $1′ ztmt in ens
the respondent/insurangre
written statement Vifitthe
petition and conteizrijng fl1″‘a.t*. to be payable
was subject to the of the policy and
sought for. ef V’ I
u Ce the abevc pleadings the Tribunal
_ “fie folioteinfiissuesz
._ ‘1. Whether the petitioner proves that on
* 1992 at about 6.30p.m near fifutaganahalfi
V ‘ _”_~n__ri1?gzge the 15’ respondent drove the jeep bearing
. Rfo.tKA~35 M 187 in a rash and negiigent marmer
had ocmsed injuries to him?
2. Whether the petitioner is entitled to get
compensation? ff so, to what extent and from
– 4»-
6. In support of his case the claimant
as PW.1 and one Dr. Vishwaprasad was
and he got marked Exs.P1 to P16 _
not let in any evidence befoIe;»’_the.,74I’;ibi2;1£iLt tl1t~;.._
material and evidence Von’ the
compensation of 6% ea
fiom the date of petition dis~satisfied
with the Judglnent has preferred
this appeal’ of etxmpensafion.
7. 1 have heard Recidy, learned
eounsei for the ; ‘appellefit. _ ;’.¥r’i..t’.%.Z~I.l§’:-::iel1ur, learned
the insurance company.
3. .:tt’:t*is subi1;i_t.tec1.~et_1;’ of the appellant that he had
” A sgme:–é&- of 4.15%», hip zegon and other injuries and the
” ~ . appzeciate the extent of permanent
did not grant any amount of compensation
of loss of future income and that the award
of eofiipensation on the other heads are also meager.
%
-5..
Themfozt, he requests this oourt ,thc
compensation awarded by that ” .1: . ”
9. Per contra, it is
company that P’W.2 matter had
contradicted twp diooofity certificates
Exs.P15 and Plévianéi himself had stated
that ho Work and therefore,
the owaxding any compensation
9:1 the income and that the awani of
compensation on othorixoastis proper which does
not call for any iote:_fr:_1cnoo”
10. The my consideration is as to
whctEofA….tl1e ought to be enhanced in the
H instagt V
tho pleadings on record and the
*i;11o}:it:ao’4t”E?’$h.£’.2. Though it is submitted by the appellant
that ‘lie not personally Workzing in the field, but only
%
“6′ I
supervising agrictlltural operations, neverghoieoefééeié Vilact
that theme was disability to an extent ube
disputed, but the Tribunal iiot’ on
the head of disability. VTa1:m’ “g ¢f’~§1″1e ._f.he (
accident ococured in 1592. “fa’ct”jtI:1at””ikd1e
daily income at of’ fiot..ha*:ve been above
Rs.7(}/ – and by apolydog of 16, a sum
of Rs. 4(),{32:_Q,’¢_ is awarded under
the heed towards disability. In
is awarded towards loss of
amenities, taking the to Rs.45,000/–.
The enhanced conjtpensafion interest at the rate
of 6% “t1«V:.1eE”7datVVé:A..of Jddfihent and Award of the
Tritggznai ” out or the said enhanced
corfipeflsafion, ‘IV?s.30,DOO/– with proportionate
” A intereéf be dejxoféited in any Nationalized Bank for an
4, A. . of and the appellant shall be entitled to
interest from the said deposit. The balance
shall be released to the appellant.
fl
..7..
1 1. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed mi.
any order as to costs.
K’VN*