"'-"If ,.'.-"V_~A'V'\' VI nnnlifllnnn rilurl Luulu Ur l\AKnlAEA1U-I HIGH GUURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH'
..1..
IN THE HIGH cmm GP' KARHATAILA M' BAHas..:§c::22E
DATED THIS THE '26*** BAY cm FEBRUA§§;Y'{2;C§'{§I9'V4
BETWEEN':-
KIRANKUMARKODI
510 K.8.NAVA.DA
AGED ABOUT 28 _--
R;A*rm.1444, 13?,
maapmamcx % _ A
'
snmauzptxnw T' - ,1;
BAHc.a.LmE.:;:1. ._ %
-- I ...APPELum'r
(BY; $121 v:._SI~:AsTR1, wv.,)
1.
1’3′-mm’ co. LTD.
R«:’:.£-1_=.i. Umryfifimnmn
. Anxmcfl. MI$3=_l’i3N mm
‘-.m::. ms mmvmammm mm L”I’IJ.,
_ ‘JFFICE, vim! KAR.NHi’AKA
CIRCUIT HOUSE RGAI}
DISTRICT –
‘V V …RE3PC3NI}ENT8
–run ‘urban: 7» air’:-n-r-I-a-I-nu:-3 1
In-“I 3-nxrvnl vi n-I-nu’:-|u-|l\.l-I I’li\FrI \.«\.lU’llI V!” l\l-IIIIVI-Ill-|l\.l| l’ll\ll’l DUUKI U!’ IKHKIWRIRKA HIGH UQUKT UF
-2-
THIS MFA FILED ms 1273(1) OF 1»s\,*llllac:r
gamer TI-E JUIDGMENT ANIJ A’WARD..~«~~.I3g%”IE¥D_”
3.5.5200? PASSED at MVC No.3394;20m ,
OF Tim ADDL. JUDGE, CGIJRT OF sMAIéL’.”gA1JV$Es,”‘ _
MEMBER, MACT-V, I~mI’R<}PQLrrAH ¢ L
BANGALORE, (scar-:.r:o.53 PAR?I'LY.,, Alznawmell 5
cum PE'I'ITIDH ma C(3IaIPENE':..I%.'I'If£)¥I mm 'E'aEf.I£I{;TlV1'§3"'–..
ENHANCEMENT 0? coxumtsagnafi,
THIS ma come on my
TI-IE coum DELIVERVEEQTHE
J U
This claimant
lfiafifmpiilnsation, being dis-
auatiafiafl. made' by MAUI', at
Ba11ge..1ore O6 d.ate~d:8.6.0'7.
' ..2A.–v.Th¢«v.Vlfelcvant facts of the case are that an
8.00 p.m., when the claim' ant
his Kir1etic*- Honda on Railway parallel
4' Bangalsre, at that time, a
'11' lorry bearing registration No.KA;:.25-6154 wafi
/'
nu-nun ruwn I-ilullllll vr nnnnninnn Hwin HOUR'! "Ur'li'Al(NATAl(A HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH"!
=<I-II?-Inriu Iuwvlni TI nurlliliiilrnillfi"-I'II'lIII 'WT'
-3-
driven in a rash and negligent manner and
against the c1a.1man’ t, as a result, he fail
sustained injuries. He was shift-531
side hospital and afier first aid, ‘
Mallige Medical Centre for iiet’
patient and toek fellanw that
he sufiered permanent of the
injury sustaitlad in the
petiticm seelnrg’
8. On rewipt the
res-pon&nts “‘a,I1Vd S reapective .
wrtittcn Athe*««~~aven11cnta made in
the claim dismiasal ef the claim
above p1eadmgs’ , the
I; following 71381133 for its
the petitioner proves that, on
::j’QD.3.2006 at about 3.00 p.m., on
/”/’
…—- —–u— -v- cu-uuunvruu-III!’
_ 4 ..
Railway paralal % road,___
Subramanyanagar, Bangalore, he
with an accidcnt 8: sustained inj_v.iiiri¢Isu,._’._:”.j’
was due to aotzicmahle negfigeni;¢”iLri§ti::;{fi ‘
the part of driver (if A
Rmishafion H9.KA-25-;6s13.§ iéiw. ii” « . :7 A
-2. ‘Whether the peflficfier is
compensaficn?’ If sic; a;i%ii¢.ay mudh and
from whom? ‘
3- ‘
I’1’i$VWi:a.3ci the clajm’ ant
examiniiiami Dr. vrr. V-cnkatcsh –
PW-2; witfiiiaa as PW-3 and got marked
the respozidents did not let in
the basis of the material on
V tribtmal awarded compensation of
. +i)00/- with imcrcst at the rate of 6% p.a.
“the date of claim pctiticin till realisation. Not
satisfiizd with the said quantum of
9y»-
,~”ih¢
I “V! -A \g\-fivni Ur Iv-\IsIVlHIl-\l\l-I ruun LUUKE U!” KAKNAIAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH ‘
-5-
compensation, the claimant has preferred
appeal
5. I have heard 1ca.:’x1cd:=.__ ccuzzilscf Afcr “t’i2c
appellant.
6. It is eubmittcs:i:’_’.c_n ~–£.1’1c’ A
that the
& abrasions head injury,
fracture cf Vccnlplctc tear of
patellar ‘u the evidence of the
Doctor, ix;jurVi:Vcc5’4Vvfcru:§;’..’c’5g_rievcus in nature. That
wasaa.an~pancnt in Malligc Medical
to 24.3.06 and that can account
injuries, he was permanently
‘ the circumstances, the tribunal
have awarded compcncaticn on the head
ljificssi of future earning capacity” or in the altemativc
the head “disability”. In the instant case, no
fr
‘part c
..w.-y_-u:.ynanu vi nruuu-|u’II\l’| TIIIJI1 I.-\lUKI Ur IHKNRIHKA HIGH
-5-
oonlpensatien has been awarded on the said hgads
and therefcere, he requests this Court to ~
ccmpensation an the said heads.
7. Having regard to the
the counsel for the appe1Eé1m:h,V
arises far my cozxsicjzg-ra.b’c;11..VViis._ whetlfier the
judgment and await? ‘the tribunal
requires any :_’L;1tg§rferci 11c:#’§_:’V.«: –
;:I;s;%e§*i;a1«.(§:1H_V.é’ecord, it is evident
that mum ¢£:%;:–%i%%;sS,£jco/+ has been awarded by
* _ ‘
the tr-ibun”&I_’ on :.he%%ro;1ow~mg heads viz, ‘pain and
._gufi:e;tEZng§R§.50’,’Ci0Q,f«+, “less of amenities cf life –
fiuiedjcizza and attendant charges —
Rs.5Q,oo0_1%– k ‘loss af carning for the laid up
“-R’s.15,o9o/-,2 H/*
-unuu swan: vu nouns’:-nu-any-| nlwri 1.9!-uflunl I.lI”‘ nnnununnn I’!ll’l”‘I HUUKI UP IHKIVRIAKA HIGH CQURT OF I
-7-
-On perusal of the judgment
seen that far two injuries, the award 3
‘pain and suffering” in on the highattfsick-.._.:
though medical e::pense$”TV__v{:-ii V
proved, compensation. .. “’13. J%Rsi5o,kQDo;.
presumably because nafi has been
made on the of which
also does as such. As
far as “loss of incemc
during’ C€)1’1CCI’11Cd, though it
xhaa bggzx _v;:c2:;’.”1 i:¢:~;zv’1_§1’c=;-:.t”:I ‘.i;:3c1e appellant that he waa
Engixleer at Infosys and
F3s.25,(}G0/- p.m., the salary
is produced which is in respect of
there is I16 evidence on reward ta shcw
fifi account 91’ the injuries austainad in the
.u_4§;c*.H<v'.;.ident, there was no deductions or non~payment
V ofaa_1a.ry, even than the tribunal has awarded a. sum
/2"'
' """""' V' "-1-" 'H-'I-'H III!-7!"- -I-_-\.funI vr nnnnvnlnnn I'!l\Ji"I LUUIU Ur IKAKNAIAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH 1
,3-
of Ra.15,000f- under the said head. As far as;
compensation on the head “loss of
capacity’ is concerned, a1thoug.h””the A
examined as PW-3 and he has
was whole body disability tile in
not award any {!{)II1]iZIa!’1;::34§137El’llif”§ii’:_ ‘iicad,
because cf the fact ircated the
appellant wan: Doctor
waa that reliance
could noi:.._ be irtiicience «of PW-3 as to
the disabfli{§*«…_aa3i§:a$:’é§1” Moreover, EVBII as
par Pii;§§i1,i?%ii:¢ f1;§§éitur¢«’Wa3 united and he could fold
iigfiifuld sit. In View of clear admisaion
of held that there was no ‘loss cf
— capacity” and thereby did net award
K ciiiitupensation on the aaid heads. Hcswwever,
note of the evidence of PW}. and PW-3-the
the tribunal awarded compensation Of
/9′
…-p- -uwwa-nu tn II:-urn-up-nu;-nu’.-g [1
-wII \,-_.-V-(‘Uni Ur nnnlvnlnnn rllllrl EAJUIII Ul’ IAKNAIAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH ‘
-9-
Rs.70,00l3/- can the he-.ad “loss of amenities”
awarded total conzpsnsation sf
‘I’ak1ng’ in overall View of the matiéf;”I« V’
award of compaenaation on
aufiering’ i.:::., to an extent fin
the head of “lama of’ :« of
R.-$70,000/– are Aon reasons
have been ta why no
head “futune
earning the absence of any
material #1033 of income during
&——–aum af Rs.15,000j– hag been
the fact that the
– the head ‘pain and sufibring” and
. ‘ ‘–“1V~V”.xu”ag pf ainiénifies” are rather disprcaportionatc and a
%;§}¢m£%%ies.15,ooa;- has been awarded towards “losa
during treatment periacf” and censidaaring
nature of injuries suffered by the appellant, I
%/’4”
-s-an -“‘\g\-awn! ur nnawanannn ruurl L.UUI(i OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIG
_. 10-
find that the award made by the _t.rih_z_;na.§ Hdfiesfv a’1{:»f.:4_’ ‘V
call for any interference in thfa ”
For the, afar’-ssnaici reasons; fig ‘r’c,§¢:’tedf;
