High Court Karnataka High Court

Krishna Bangera vs Mr Balachandra Beeranna Nayak on 5 October, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Krishna Bangera vs Mr Balachandra Beeranna Nayak on 5 October, 2010
Author: B.Sreenivase Gowda
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAIQ AT BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE O5?" DAY OF C3C'I'QBER', 2010
BEFORE

THE HOBPBLE hm.JUSTICE ESREENIVAS-E 

M.F.A. NO. 1061 1/2065 (Mvc)%%&¥T%[ 1 5   _

gmwmg:   

KRISHNA EANGERA

AGED ABGUT 26 Yam

810 CHANDU EABGERA A M 

RIG KAPWU HQUSE 'V 
mama 'VILLAGE AND mm',  ». _'
PRESENTLY rem!' V    "  j "
Knsmm mag, 75,   
unum mxmc ARE I)I$'l'RI(3T        *

(BY am: PAVA2€5 cmmm.$mm_.H, ADV.)

éfl

1.

-mt Bfi1sA<}}'iA_NDRA'BEE1E*ARNA namx
" A¢3:ED";fi.B'(':f£IT'5Q '(Ram
<3/Q EE.ER£;i'E%,"v
ago
I)3:3'IfRIc'1'

-THE msuamcn co 13m

.1′ j; _ OFFICE, I FLOGR,
551 301
QREP mm 13.11., 123.0 A’? UDUP1,

% commx cm. amm mm

P 3 mm: 1903 R ARI!

T % ‘< 09:9 snarrma vmm, mnaez, mum
= masmamms

HUPIGE TO RI I8 DI$PEN8EB WITH VIC 13'? 29.9.20 10)

Q?

22

MFA FILEB {H8 173(1) OF’ EV ACT, AGAINST’
JUI)GEB$HT AND AWARD DATED 18.10.2008 PASSED

Ham/acme on THE mm or pnmcmm, own. mmm {*.m.m~I.j'<,
& ADDYYIOHAL mar. UDUPI, PARTLY mmwme ,_
mrrrmn mm commnmmn Am: ssmmwc; Emm.15:»:mm:m. :

OF' COBKPEN3.&T'i{3N.

THE APPEAL comma or: mix _

THE COURT DELIVERED THE F’0LL0WIHG%’eV A’ . _ 2
This appeal E by the’ ‘ zgfilhanccmctxt of
mmpcnaation by

2. i and with the
commt of 2:15;; for the parti&, it

is taken up fmf V

. “” ‘bf wmmnienm, tha part:ie.s are

rcfe.rred referred to in the claim petition

‘ ‘The brief facts at the case:

. 9.3.2007, when the claimant was travelhng’ in a

mgiauaaion No. KA-19-B-7819 as a. conductor

Vimar Pulkeri Juxzctian, Karkala, a. lorry bearing @t1’at.1’9n

t?§-K

3
Na.KA-30-B-258′? came in a rash and negligent manner

and dashed wixmt the bus. As a reault, the claimant fell

down and suastained mjuries. I-Ience, he filed 3. <:.}£'sj1;r1

mtition before the MACT, Uciupi seeking %

ms.4,4o,5m/-. The Trihsunal awarded

comenaatioxx 0f Rs.5,w0/- with 4' 'V

5. as there is no diapute of

accident, negligence and liability_ the inf the

afiending vehicle, the ozvziy?’ for my

%
Whgthcr’ awarded by
the just remsonable er dam it
” ‘~ ¢f:.1{x.i::;a::1c<:A:'*.t1'4::.–.*'–..*::.!_–'«':r'-'""'

tkm learned counsel appearing fer

pfi 'perusing' the judment and award of the

12113 View that the compexmtiaon awarded

is not just and rcaaanabla, it is an tha

and htn.c:r: E is required. to be emhanceed.

fir

7. As per wound cartificaic: Ex.P-4, tin:

has suataimd simpk: ixzjuriee. The injuries v 2

the claimant are supported by area! evidence of

ezxaminad as pw-1. The claimant.

ducts): regarding nature of injzzrk-:5. .V ” ‘

3. Medical bills a;__ Ex,l3-#5. the
claimant has spent a sum medical
cxpemes. proper tea
award 3. glabal %%Rs’;1o;ooo/- as against
Rs.5,000,’-

9. ‘m allowed in part. Thc

by the Tribunal $5 modified to

thc.Ve:3 §té§i_t’ abavc. The claimant ‘m enfitled for

ef RI.5,€l00[- with interest at

‘”–?:§3vi>~.__’1’.*e.aAA..fi-c$:c1:; 3~thc: date of claim petificm till the date cf

% A x % “raa}:§.¥.sa1;.im1x.–‘

The Ixxsurancc Company is directeci to dcpcsit

iiha enhazmed wnipenwion amount togather with intexwt

8;:

within tvmmomhs firm the date ofreccipt eta copy afthis

judmcntand the same: :13 arclered to be released V

<31' the claimart immediately after the cwosit.

1 1. Na cram" aats scram.

BM