High Court Karnataka High Court

Kumari A N Aishwarya D/O A N Naveen vs Sri Lakshmana S/O Sri. Devadiga on 8 November, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Kumari A N Aishwarya D/O A N Naveen vs Sri Lakshmana S/O Sri. Devadiga on 8 November, 2010
Author: B.Sreenivase Gowda


{By Sri. Ravish Benni, Adv. for R2,
R1 ~ Served}

This MFA is filed U/S. 173(1) of
Judgment 8: award dated 30/ 1; 1/ 2007′ passed i’r1_’ V’

No.1324/O6 on the file of the Districtp
Track Court, Shimoga, partly aliowtingt the*–eIairi1e.peti.ti’on

for compensation & _rseekir1’g_ enhaaneerneni;

Compensation.

This appeal Corning ,9-111jiforuAdmission,-‘this day,
the Court, delivered’ foltloxtg-‘ing:~:.__’».se

This for enhancement of

eompsensatioii “by the Tribunal.

12. V_ _vHeard.VV’Th’e is admitted and with the

Cotnsent o§.1earn’e’d”‘Counse1 appearing for the parties, it

final disposal.

3. Forthe sake of convenience parties are referred to

“as-theg} are referred to in the ctaim petition before the

“i’rit”)Auna1.

4. Brief facts of the case are:

$535″

That on 7-11-03. when the claimant was”–going

with her parents on Seebinakere – “at

Thirthahalli, in front of Eshwara Naika’s ho-use;

bearing registration No. CTX–6-2t”i2″c’anie iri~a»’ras:h’V”an’d

negligent manner and dashed against thg

a result, she fell down “Hence.
a claim petition was she was
minor. before seeking
compensation”jp:’.tof Tribunai by
impugned.’ fltaward has awarded
evllwith interest at 6% p.a.
by ‘the of compensation awarded by

thegjl “Tribunal.V_V_VVthe claimant is in appeal seeking

a ‘enlianeernent of compensation.

Asltfihere is no dispute regarding occurrence of

accident, negligence and liability of the insurer of the

‘3.fte;1ding vehicle, the only point that remains for my

iconsideration in the appeal is:

Whether the quantum of
compensation awarded by the Tribunal is

(925

just and proper or does it call forfi
enhancement? i

6. After hearing the learned Counsel

and perusing the award of theHATbriburiai’,v’ of the’

View that the compensation aufard:eci..

not just and proper, it is “the lower srideianid«-therefore: t’

it is deserved to be EiflhaIlCA€3_(1l.llV:A’ L M H

7. As per Ex.P.5 claimant has
sustained the l V V
i] _ temporo mandibular
“”” to : .

a fore head right side above the
right side above the lateral
eye-brow Zxicrns haernotoma,
X 0.E5cm over forehead right side.
f_ Afitasion 1 X. 0.5cms over right temporal
4′ part.

iv} Abrasion over mid~media1 aspect of left leg 2

X lcms.

V] Abrasion over lower end of right patella

l.5Cmsx lcm.

vi) Abrasion over anterior lateral’-.__jorioti’oni’ -of V’

upper middle 1/BN1 X’

vii] Abrasion over anterior aspect poof. juricti-one of,

middle lower
Injuries are

8. Claimant has injuries.

Considering’: =;a- is awarded
towards K V

9. inpatient for two days at
Sri. Jaytgiehamearafpenldral’General Hospital, Thirthahalli,

anti looked by” her parents as she was 3 1/2 years

le;a\}fing’.their regular work. Considering the same, a

._s{1iIi — is awarded towards medical,

ineide–ntal”” expenses and for the inconvenience caused

V ” to..the”parent.s of the claimant.

Claimant is a 3 1/.2 years old child and has

sustained seven simpie injuries. Therefore, awarding

compensation under the head loss of incoIne.–di.1ring
Eaid up period, loss of amenities and

income does not arise.

11. Accordingly the appeai din’

Judgment and award of

claimant is entitled for any_..axdd.ititona1hcornpesfisation of
315,000/– with tnteee feet -from the date of
claim it

12. The directed to deposit the
interest within two
months: frornof H receipt of a copy of this

judgment)» ‘Vl'”heV’san1eV’is ordered to be invested in ED.

iv;~any,na.tiona1iZed”or scheduled Bank in the name of

till she attains majority.

oiifdier as to costs.

8&3

Iiiaffi

§mgn*