High Court Karnataka High Court

Nagamma vs B S Shivakumar on 12 June, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Nagamma vs B S Shivakumar on 12 June, 2009
Author: V.Jagannathan
    

Wei é:.:m.m'"§* £3?" mawmmam WWW £Q!§£~:'b:5§"E i§;Z%%'*' .ka*a3°Mm.%A 1-vamw agmmm wr Mmmmmm I-swim uuum U!' KRKNAIAKA 3-um-z &,?m£m"§" mi MRNAEAKA fifififi 

11: mm Hxmi ccmrr oz' xamzmaxa, sazmwam

DATE3 "i'3'{IS THE 13TH 13%'? GE' JUNE 2059

E»$?C}RE
mm: HQN'BLE2 MR... JUSTICE v.JF$¥%1*'.'m*-\?i""""'  :'~ 'V

MFA Na 5273 05* 2009 4′ %
BETWEEN V

NAGMIKA
cxo aaaanm AGED AEQLF? 56,’r”EABg3
R39. FUTTRSIDDHPPA ” z
YALEAPURA TUMKUR. V _ V %

._. mam?

my sgi “£=r::rEé;1,”;’._:;a’v ADVQCAT 12:}

as ‘S Vsrziafiwxma .. ‘ –

Sm. sziyzjz-‘:.e’e2=a_
AGES A653}? ‘~17 ‘~Y$A8.S
aim. mrxmvhxkrémka

‘:.:§i:r,ix*”2=.:p mam Irestmanca co mm
‘=z.;;.tvrsm1smL oswrcm
‘ aaysnm camemz
.~ 3 RCSFLEI, TUMKUR TEEN
2? ms Mnwsma.

.. . . REESPGNDENTS

‘fay sri M}~i3%.1*«¥ 5, Jmv. 5’09. 9.1,
% sR:a:.amm.DHAa azmcmnx, Ame”. mg 9.2}

!~%§’h FELE9 HIS ‘.’f?3{1} 9? MY ARC? A£?&I!~¥S”£’ T}-IE
JUQGHENT ARE AVRRE XIRTE: 30.11.2337 EWSSED IN
FWC Ni). 53C§f2§§t’;S SN THE EH35 (FF THE P313. CIVIL
JSEDGE {Si-“£.I3N} ENS EGBL. MRCT’, Tiflfiéfifii, EARTLY

Efiéé €3fl*UK’E’ Q5 K&RN.&’m\E(fi.. HEGH fif K.%RN.QTAK& Hfififi-€ flflififl? $54 WRWATAKA WQH Cfiiééig W MfiKNA”§”fi’iKA HIGH COUWF OF KfiRNATAKA E-HGH C

Amawxm THE: cmméi e’z:’rI’rI::m FGR cmiwmismflcsa ma
SEEKIHG EI}’ai’I’L*”i1’¥@{E1’i’F OF COME’E€SATION AND ETC.

This Appeal rscsming on fear orders this ‘
the Quart delivared the fellawiag:-{AM ‘

JU%fl{EI!”‘f’ .

Haard tha counsel far par£i’e,$ an anfid
with their consent, thé —. §::>pe-‘£31 wi’3″~-.__t;§’itan up far

final dispasal. A

25″ :.’V¢’~_:’¢’)V1v-:(§”a ;:s.7¢i:5.c:r1 awarciad to
t.ha _.::.l;§:’i§#é1n5i:;,:A_i_$quastian on the ground
erred in applying the lower
the amcmnt awarded towards
“‘.4’L.;:§3a, “a.1’eV_1 eV’1’V1″.1′.1:g.’as..’ of life, less cf inccrme and

K3.ss:”a. ‘a._:f*~.§aira and auffarings is an the law: side.

nearfi the iaarnsct carunsel far the

and an a perusal :15 the award at the

” ~?EjxiVi51…1nal, I find that tha Tribunal has cammittaii
error in taking the multiplier ‘*8’ inxteazi of
‘.11’. Cansequantly, er: the hem at 3.035 sf
future aarninga, the aggellant :25 entitleefi fer a
sum af 9.3.8643;-. ‘rewards loss at amersitias af
life; a furthfir sum sf 8.s..3.€:,{3$8£- is awardaé.

it

‘U

QM $303M’! 0% mmwmmm HQGM mzmm §€e~.§3%.§€,MJW%–s%Wr.fl» maém uwuxz um immmmnma. rmzm LUUKK ur Ikflitflfluflmfl rims:-2 mwmlm ur aanmumnkm nmm:

Towards 1335 of income during treatment pegiad, a

fu:thar- sum: cf R3.33GflJ~ is wwardad. ~Tfifi3;3 the

compensation gats enhanced by R$.§¢,§§6};§f;fha

said amvunt carriea interest at Gfi per annum.;

4. Aggaal ailawefi in gakté

fiau { §f . Q€;”;. ; “.Wf