M.F.fiLNG. 5€v$3!20()4
IN THE HIGH COURT GF KARMA TAKA A T BANGALCTIRE
DATED THIS THE 91%: DAY 0? JULY, ~ . VA
:PIRESEN'f':
THE HON'BLE M1ra...1Us'm:1.: L
AND . 1
THE HON'B.L.E H: %BzLL»a.v1mi A
M.F,A.Na_ 5o43%i}.?2oo4%iMV)_
BETWEEN
1 MLATHA V
wJosMEEHA:éSHas.uN9AaAM - ~
39YEAR£3
are aA;:AGoF§AL.;at2.:Ln:N<3, _.
IST MAIN, NEAR 'RAMA._FEMf?LE _ '
»MEw':H:;=sééA;3ANa'FzA_V ..
#BANG:§LQ_RE4"§§_ -. .
V' % _ 4' APPELLANT
{By Sr_i. R KRISHNA RE§0Y;_Ab"fOCATE )
. ' eumou Sim @ GHUNDA BHAI
- @ swim NAGANSURE
s:Q.iNm.M NAGA$URE
mo H:E<'oL: VILLAGE
..AL'r*a_ND TALUK
GLILBARGA ms"!
,.z. '
'zit H K as AwAiAH REDDY
' MAJOR S10 LATE NUMCSNAMAPPA
RIAT 388, PB' MAIN ROAD
8TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA
BANGALGRE-95
3 NEW £NDiA ASSURANCE COMPANY LMITEQ
REGIONAL OFFICE
M.F.A.N0. 5043:9904
NC) ?'2, UNITY BU#LDiNG ANNEXE
WSSJON ROAD
BANGALORE
REF'.B':' ITS REGDNAL MANAGER
(SJLOMAHESH AENFOR R3 ; '_ é , _
mas M.F.A. as FILED ms 173(1) ds%_ M'Tv Act' .ae¢._¢N;~:{T~.I'HE
3 7' ~ ._
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATEDITZAO4 FIRES EN MVC-é.NO§43461i)1 GNW
THE F#LE OF THE V ADDL. JUDGE, MEM8ER;..Mé'«€ZT, COURT-.OF SMALL.' '
CAUSES, MAYOHALL UNIT, BANGALORE, SCCH-~20' -.PARTLY ALLOWING
THE CLAIM PETWION FOR CQM ENSAW N "AND; SEEKJNG
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSAWON. K v _
This M.F.A. c§:a1}j,¥ng~'_VAorg5 . this day, I-K.
nrnmpm J, delivered the_J_r:;m~wria;.g:__é "
the judgment and
award':vdat_Ve$l f passed by the Motor Accident
Cia§ms 1'Al'ri§:34unva!VV":_a:'?ic§._'»;':'::_Ni§JitienaI Judge, Bangalore, in
_ Q M.v;§: r§a. _748§t6'--$.$fV._2C301-
émpugned judgment and award, the
Qfitnted compensation of Rs_3,%_06OI- vw'th
K ' V ._»»interé«3t$at 6% gm. from the date of petitien tili 'me date of
'~ ' i*§a iEsation. Awrievad by mat, appellant has med this
:¢_1_,,aLV.1p9%a£, seeidng enhancement.
3. In brief, the facts are:
V.
M.F.A.N0. 5G43!E®4
The appellant sustained injurias in the accident that
occurred on 13.10.2001 at about 6.00 pm. at
Kundalahaili- White Field Road, infront of C01! Totj;:*¥.§.T.and
Travels, Bangalore, en acceunt of the rash
driving of the vehicie bearing No. xx:
driver. The appellant cIaer.u%edny'z¢;arnpensaia:;nnLk Va:
Rs.7,00,000I-. The Tribunal hgs éiwétdednn
of Rs.3,09,060l--- enterer.-sifat 3% ,5.a§fnwg:ieved by
that, appellant has Diappeal, seeking
enhancemenft.j: H V' V V "
;4'nTheV §nij.nseA!'._"Vf6'r'V4fl1e appeflant contended
that nawarded by the Tribunal towards
pair}. .. gndk rnedica! expenses, attendant
fG:1_nveyVnnne, nnurishing fond, loss of future
of amenities of life is totally inadequate
mt; mereiare, it needs to be modified. He also submitted
& ' ihati appeuant has suffered permanent disability of 25%
of the whole body and inspite of that the
L/4
M.F.A.N0. 5643/W
Tribunal has taken the disability at 10% which is totally
incorrect and therefore, it needs to be modified.
5. As against this, the learned counsel
the third respondent submitted that the
consideration of the material an reeerdj
just and reasonable compens._ation”a_nd .
not call for interference.
6. We have ._t_”ne submissions
the parties.
7.” The for our consideration is;
Wnatiser awarded by the Tribunal is
~. 8;i_ie~.;_relevant to note, the appeliant has suffered
V –V injuries: (a) Circumferential degleving injury
efieftviiforearm with sluggish peripheral circulation (I3)
hléiraeture of left hand middle finger phalanx and (3)
‘4 Wmuitiple abrasions ever face and neck. The appellant
has taken treatment for a period of 36 days as inpatient.
lnspilze af that. the Tribunal has awarded enlar a sum af_
l/
M.F.A.NO. 504313094
Rs.32,mOl— tow:-3r$ pain and sufferings which is–totally
inadequate. Having regard to the nature of
the duration and nature of treatment,
view, a sum of Rs.50,000l- woefild
towards pain and sufferings; it L,
9. The Tribunaz has atom at’ %Rs,1,3oo;._
towards attendant nae taken
treatment as inpvatient” 36 days and
therefore, by the Tribunal
«’is”1’inedequate and therefore, it
needeto it is modified granting
cornpensatieniv of .F’€s.A5,
” fhettttvérnount of Rs.5ml- awarded towards
Rs.3,00fll- awarded towards nourishing
is-,__” inadequate and therefore, it neex to be
mom. Accordingly, it is modified granting
‘rocemgdensation of Rs.2,000l~– towards conveyance and
‘J ‘”Rs.5,000l— towards nourishing food.
Lt/to
MF. A340. 504332804
11. The Tribunal has
Rs.31,200l- inwards loss of future fi°:9u
income of the appeliant at ”
adopting mufltipiier of 15 az$d:.,::§ss!;ingA.ihe. e-ms:ny%%at12%.%
The Doctor has depaseda1a§ a§pg|Ia5i%hasj suffered
permanent disability the whole body-
There is no; := tp Therefore, it is
proper to The appeliant has
work and also doing
house it is proper to take the
inc;c:;1€*i1’e}Aof t4i.V1é’a}5pfai’e|l.%;v1:nt..’at Rs.2,00Dl- per month, instead
% per month. Accordingly, it is taken. The
aged about 35 years at the time of
V fherefore. the appmpriate muttiplier is 15. If
fb锫–di£§§biiity is taken at 25% and mulfiplier of 15 is
‘ héd§3j;A3ted, taking the income of the appellant at 2,GDOI– per
‘4 H mo=nth, then, the compensation payable towards loss of
future eaminfi comes to R:-:.1,08,D00l-~ and accordingly, it
‘E awarded: ,
u/’
l\r£.F.fiL.NO. 5043f206=4
.7.
12. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.3T.9.,Q0w-
towards £035 of amenities of fife. The appeltani
permanent disability of 25% in respect of the
and she is unable to £111 her hand ar;idd(§ >
appeliant has to suffer
Therefme, the compensation l§y’t!w4§_a’Trfi=%):V.Viii;!auiVViVt>\’VatardsVV
£035 of amenities of life’j:E;3.«1inad駮¥.;e2’Véinqtheiréforé; it needs
to be modified. Amaangsy, st granting
compensationnf3-s.2(§,OG0f%f ” h ‘V ‘
13. j awarded by the Tribuml
towarfis ” is just and proper and
thareforé; :__§6t1v¢a~§:§-~’Lfor interference.
,Thé” compensation payable comes to
and the bre.»ak– up is as feflowsz
»mw»ms* %
. Towards” Pain and sufferings Rs. 50,090!-
Tdwafds Medina! expenses Rs.2,30,560l-
‘ ‘-[awards attendant chargm Rs. 5,003/-
..T<)wards conveyance Rs. 2,000!-
Towards ncurishing food Rs. 5,000!-
Towards ices of future earnings Rs.1,G8,000i-
Towards loss of amenities of
Life Rs. 20 000;'-
Total Rs.4,20,560I-
Lt//%
M.F.A,.N0. 5043133134
Accordingly, the appeal is a::awedf§k%j*%%ayn§} %
impugned judgment and award passed if; K V’
we No. 484612001
compensation cf ‘V V
with interwt at 6% P-3}’~~..fF0fi1″‘f}’#’é~;’j;#éie.A§f flt*he*pejtitien till
the date of reasisafion. 1
The the amount
within eight
camfiensatson, 50% shall be
invested in._tfie any nationalised bank far
a pefigid ef th.fe”e- The appeliant shafl be entifled to
fntgrest accrued on it.
._ award, accordingly.
Iudgg
Sflfiik
Judge
tsn*