IN THE HIGH CDURT OF KARHATAKA AT BAKGALORE
DATED THIS THE 12"' DAY OF' DECEMBER. 2008
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRJUSTICE SUBHASH B.AD_I % 5.: if A'
BETWEEN
1 M MUNEESH
AGED30YEARS
sic: MUNIGGWDA " .
150.99, THALAGHATPAPURA P03? _
KANAKAPURA ROAD -
BAN-'3ALORE--62 'a._..APPELLANI'
(BY SR1: GJRIMALLAIAI-IA.._ADV.) VA 'L
AND
1 THE oR1EI~rrAL.:1I€$URAreca:.'-so-1.51313
REGIONAL O'E".Fii3E».;N0.4x4'/45 ~
LEO S}IOPI*i'I'.{(V},COi£t'215i..E'X.¢ '
REs1DENcY.Ro;sn..,_ '
BANGAL_ORE--25_ ' _
BY ITS MANAGER»,
2 SR£IL1OHAN"
S/e:,gR1sHNA REDD ,
M.a..Jo:R,_A---%.. ----
. KAGOAL1?%.IRP._
_ :«;AN.mKP~.1?is12A .MAIN ROAD
" BA'NGAI.-ORE SGUTH
K ...RESPONDENTS
« M (53% SEE: A M ‘v.Er§KATEsH, ADV. FOR 1:-:1)
._ *1″;-as Ema IS FILED U/S. 173(1) OF MV ACT AGA§NS’I’ THE
J«:;L:mn_«:1~r:* AND AWARD DATED 1/8/2006 mssxzo EN we
;\Io~.55.13″;’a5 on THE FILE OF’ THE xx mm, JUDGE, MEMEER
V. V~V:”V!%L:°’5;¢’C,’-‘I’-‘.17, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, METROPQLITAN AREA,
T BANGALORE (SCCHX7), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PE’§’I’i’IQN
COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT O?
‘W .V “C<f)¥s6PENSATI€)N.
TEES APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS BAY, THE
C€}{}R’I’ DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-3-
conveyance and nouzishmcnt. Further, 1033 of salary for which
the claimant was on leave is also not awarded. it is stated that,
claimant was earning Rs.5,622/ — per month.
4. Sri A.M.Venkatcsh, learned counsel appearing for
insurer snbrnittnd that, the compensation has been ..,,
awarded. Since there is no loss of future income, ‘
has not considered the same. In so . is
concerned. there is no clear evidcncn as
would aficct the claimant and
cayacity.
5. It is not in dispute that; fracture
and it is has stated that,
there is pcrn;é;n!c11tvdis.nf;§1itfif”nf’1g%~:6°.4: to the who}: body. Even
though mm 1*c::IS.1cAtion”‘ salary and loss of income,
L+;§£vex;¢r,nn%%n§§isa§mty¢ pemancnuy as stated by the
of disability, reasonable coxnpensation
‘nive }g1*anted. Tribunal has also not awanied
towaxds attendant charges. nourishment.
and incidental charges. loss of earning during the
It is stated that, the claimant was on leave for 833
Adnys.’ Considcxing the same, I am. of the epinion that, the
is entitled for three months salary at Rs. 16,866/~. He
is also entitled for Rs.10,000/~ towards transportation,
r “mg-‘
nourishment and other incidental charges. He is also entitled for
another Rs.5,0{){}/ — toiwaxds medical expenditun: which may yet
be in the form of bills and he is entitled for another
towards disability. In all, the claimant is cntitktd _
compensation of Rs.61.866)’– over and abggsrgz the.’cOmfi’cfiéz§fian .4
awantled by the Tribunal with 6%
petition till payment. . V V
Accordingly. this appeal is ;}af”-13} %
” A ….. .. y