High Court Karnataka High Court

Mohammed S/O Khaja Hussain vs K S Prabhanjan S/O Late Srinivasa … on 7 March, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Mohammed S/O Khaja Hussain vs K S Prabhanjan S/O Late Srinivasa … on 7 March, 2008
Author: B.S.Patil
IF!' THE HIGH CGbn"':" "GE-" ia'n'I'AE'nA fin? 'Bum_u.:.nuun.:u

BEFORE

mm Homnm MR.JU8'l'lCE 3.3. éfirxgi    '

Mohammad,

S] o.Khaja Hussasin,
Aged abaut 41 years, 
Cycle Rickshaw Pu11e1:,"'~~d.
R/'.o.fi'arpaia 'V'-iiiage  '

Anantapur District, _ . ' 
Now R/o. C/o;r€hadar"Bas3ia, " 
Cycle dRicks11etw;. Qwner, { =  '

Near Sanga1n44Ti§1_1;ies,_' __  
B.r_=J_1a_ry4     A  d APPELLANT
{By  '  'Mm R:-:dd'«", Adv.)
1.

_K.S.PdrabhanjanA;*-._d
4; 3;’ 0.18126 Sxinivasa Rao, _
._f_ ‘<D;?ivt::1:/ ownemg the -Maruthi-Van,
' Béflugfing ,_§3e%t.'r'9.*..ir.1-11. N-'.)=K.A.-Q4,' N-3.94,
" TR'/p;N6.8'1–,. 'Akshaya',
Near 0ct1'oiGate,
Ganeslj:-. Hagar, Bellary District.

2.d _T1ic_ Dvivis-ional Manager. %
‘ n T M! s.Orienta1 Insurance Co; Ltd., _ _ –
V — 583 101. RBBPOIIDIBNTB.

g {By SIi.’P.Subr”a.u.au'”””3′, Adv. for 132*}

Smt. Harini Shivanand, Adv. for R-2)

This appeal is filed u/s 173(1) of the -Motor Vehicles Act
against the Judgment and Awaxd dated 15.09..’20G5 passed. in

I’vi’v’C iv’o.10″.21i”2(‘:00 on the of the Member, IviAC”i’-I ifil.
District Judge), Bellary, partly allowing the claim petition for
compensation and seeking enhancement of compensation.

This Appeal coming on for admission, this

d….li.ered the following;

1. is an appeal _tl1e 1 ti} seeking

enhancement of compensatioiii; .. e

2. “‘1r- ciaitrrmt siifiered– perscr” 1n_*;”u1s-[es in mm a~’-u.ident

that 0CC1.1I’If3(i (*)’fl.v’.’?. 1 was plfliing
the cycle Station Road,
Bel1aify, a No.KA-O4/N~8394

-with high speed in a rash and
negligAeI1t:’man12ei”‘:’.=siAJ1ii: against the rickshaw. He was

trefatezi in Institute of Medical Science and later on

” . ~ _tmentin the Government Hospital.

ciiiagamg that the personal injuries left behind

disability he filed a Claim Petition seeking

it ‘ccn1pensafion in a sum of Rs.2.20,000_/-. The claimant

claim’ and examined one G.N’agaraju as R.’v’v’.1 and marked

Exs.R1 to R4 in support of their case. The Tribunal, upon
consideration of the evidence on record, both and

documentary, Iecorded a finding that the

due to the actionable negligence on the part

Maruthi Van and awarded conipensation_.v.uint. off

Rs.34,000/– along with 6% intezest.fron1A’t11eii an L

its realisation. A 12 ‘ex: :1 the “‘ooinpens__ti’;’n

4. I have heard the the parties.

5. The§.ciLafin1ant.’ records such as
matter the documents to
evidence–_ ot’Vt:Ij1eat1nent he had taken. The Tribunal
has found certificate that the claixnant had

suigfeied fractaxaeof neck of right scapula and two other simple

p and agony, Ra’.5,GGGi- towards medical expenses, Rs.9,00Gi-

loss of earnings taking the income of the injured is

x Rs.3,000/– keeping in mind the evidence on record

the fact that he was working as a Cycle Rickshaw Puller.

H 6. ‘Though counsel for the appeiiant contends that the

Tribunal has not awarded fair and reasonable amount against

H

= ..Pf<s

' th' 'rrads, th' 'o"tentioI1 urged cannot be accepted. in the
absence of examination of the Doctor and in thegahsence of
production of any medical records, the Tribunal:

in quant1fy1n' ' g the compensation under it

has been done. However, the ' -.

a reasonable sum towards loss.Vo’f._amenities~ as at

fracture suffered by the .111 ,_n13,=f ..1I_1;’ of

‘I11 I’I911:”e _ I-‘In.-4: ‘Inn.-…-I 1533 If

RS duSflI’VCS u… uL.u.\..l ..n.I.-ta, ucuu
atu'”enit”ie”. In all Otfierpmspcetés, is no need to interfexe

with the quartturn orredmgsgtnttattop gated by the Tribunal.

7. In th_ re._1__- _nd .01″ the _amge1..g, the appeal ts allowed
‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ” ._4._-4.1.. .-S

detei.~mm._ ‘ ed Ra.44,000/’–. rite ciann’ ant is entitled

for interest at§% the enhanced amount from the date

tilhhlddhdits-realisation. The enhanced amount shall be

‘ ‘deposttedxtrithin a period of eight weeks from today.