IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAXA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD
namp THIS THE 1-t mm' or JUNE, 5 ;_. A'
BEFORE
THE nomsnm Mn_Jus'm;_:E r;;12are1x'31A--: " ' J T
MISCELLANEOUS §«1I2s*If,n._§>'9EAL-- 1§ <;-.2212;.:*o£§S "
BETWEEN:
MALATESH, S/' 0 saameafim AR;%xL§;s§i.r22._&» "' ~ . _
AGE 3: YEARS
occ; HOTEL BUSINESS,
R/Q KALBUR VILLAGE-., _
:N;eANE13ENNU1«2~'r;aw;<
m9:rR1C*f;. HAVE?-1vIV; » .» "
_ «. 1' APPELLANT
(BY SR1. N4V."PtIANJUf*JA'i"1.~§,ASH)
AND: ' 'V
'fag: Aivizs N£'§}<}::~f<.34 _mRE:cToR
*:ma'4: MJRTH' WES'i'..KARNA'FA§{A
ma; ':'reA1<:s.Pr5.e;uL EEGAE},
HUBLI, ATEEUBLI 30
V . 2313'?» Efififiwffifi.
. '(.3u'r wR~QNa1,Y s1-£{>w1~: AS KSRTC, BEFORE: MAC?)
RESPONDENT
V _( r:.-3¥"s;:2':, V,S.PAi\¥CHAGAI\¥{, ADV FOR SR1 RAJENDRA c. DESAI,
THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SEC'i'iON 1753(3) OF' MY ACT
" ~' AGAINS'l" THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD 'DATED 5.13005 PASSED
m Mvc: NO,33/2002 ON 'THE F} E OF' THE CIVIL JUf){}E(SR,{)N}
71;;/f'
Area 13521.. JMFC, RANEBENUR, PARTLY ALLOWENG A_£1§§;OW€.1$Ki}_j'F-E13
CLAIM PETETION my compawszmow Amp . S.EfjK.I"NG
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS AP¥'EAL COMENG on FOR HEg}gk§--NG Tarts:
mum' DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING; ~ _ R
Junémrfigagr
Easing not safisfiéd:_.'fwit1§1_ __coInpensatio11 of
Rs.15,000/-- awarded Judge(Senior
Division), and }'\Jf'$fC§"VI\Eo.33/2002 dated
5th Januggrv, is before this Court
seeking ()f"C€}EI1p€hS€itj.OI1.
_ .£}:¢eA'¢_3r%g,'fiIneI1ts of Mr. V.S.Pa12chaga11i,
mumsel apjfirtéafing for the respon&ent--insuran<";e
i':§rnpa:33§f;"« ~
Sp " _T'i'1"e counsel for the respoI1de:"1t~insuranc:e
" :;pf.:13ant has under gone treatznent at
_ at Davangere. According to me
ap'pe.fia£ntv,A Féséas carrying on hotel business ané was
A4 '.g€ttiI§g ifiepme more: than Rs..§,f)()0/~ per month. In ordc-:1'
Zgzfdvfe the mature of the injuries sufibred by him, he has
_.._ ilvri§duced the wound certificate E)x.I~"'---4 and Ex.P-'7-
'éfldischarge card. Ex.P-'7 issued by Bapuji Hospital,
Davangere discloses that the gppeflant was admitted on
/V"-"'
,,,//'
<','_'_#../2""
4
09/ I0 and was ciiseharged on 14/ 10. Thereafter, he was
shified to the Government Hospital Further, Ex.§'--5--C)PD
produced by the appeliant goes to Show the natu1jee'.:(:§fe.1;}1e
injufies sustained by the appellant due to #316' H
and X~ray was adviseci. During the eourseef 't1f:;e* V.
x:--ray was produced. It is to be hptieerl -'2V:is__ net
the Doctor who treated the
suffered by the appellant on a lapse
cf 5 years, the appeflarrtiiiae-_ La1:;);[_.2:fi551ev§.1;'ede» PW~2 to assess
the " " PW-2 has Opififid that the
appellant §u_£ferSVVV'3_5'%§; " permanent physical disability.
.-veffhe Tiihunal, censiciering the nature of the
"--,iI1jJ,iI'ies oral and documentary evidence placed on
reeofd; Vf':V3V have quanfifieé the compensatien under
'.§peeiéi1..e1V}1{1hV$geneIaI damages. Which has not been done
global cempensation of Rs.15,0()0/- is awarded,
V' ' w«'1'iiei1 cannot be sustained. ,.:
.
/
<."M'#___,__,_,..'…–r—*"""'
6
Coolie and was getting a sum of Rs.1()O/- per ciay. Having
regard to the fact that 3 to 4 weeks is required for
troatment and follow up tzteatxzlemz, of
Rs.3,00(}/- under the head of loss of eaz’n_f1fig-«’
during laid period would _. ~ 4. A ., »
and reasonable.
8. PW–2 is of t§1e.»’opiI1ioi*1.V_ that has;
sustained 35% of éisability Vljimb, the
contentjéof be oiiéfiecied, therefore 1/3″ of
the physical disability would
come. -3roi11″4§d 1%’. considering the age of the
V. “‘3.ppVk’:1.Za21fzftA by..’;1pp1j§éiifigAvthe proper multiplier ’16’ which is
facts and circumstances of the case, the
Aontitled to a sum of Rs.63,36{)/- { 1.6.,
30{j8o.x«12x16x1 1% Rewards loss of future earrxings and
— towards loss of amenities. Thus in all, the
V% .a.}:;pe1lam: is entitied to Compensation of Fis.90,86G/-
1/<3"