High Court Karnataka High Court

Nagaraj vs M/S Oriental Insurance Company … on 27 January, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Nagaraj vs M/S Oriental Insurance Company … on 27 January, 2009
Author: K.Sreedhar Rao S.N.Satyanarayana


as: THE PHGH COURT OF’ KARNATAKA, BA;~:{;;zaL<3:ié':::"Vi' A'

DATED THIS THE 27% my 0? JA:§:IAR–3%? '¥2i.®9 3
pREsENiM ' ' "

THE HGNBLE MR. J:{¢:s*rIC §;..;{;’.v3REEL§,::+;.§R E330 1′

Arm, .

THE HONBLE ‘L;ATYA:~iAi2AYANA

BETWEEN

1

V :vI.F.AV.1′:§i:;sL3?g£$<§/2a§i37.l?:gI%g1

Sm 1qA%:s1a:2A¢: . n
$1 O"v~Pfii?.;!i;NNA., V * "

AGE–£>if40 Yf«jAR’S._f

Sm’. ‘xv

w;Lo%%.NAGAR.4s..;_

_ AGED 34 3’fEA:gs’~.~*

__?B7CY,I’H AF€E-R.,!:’a SARAKKI VILLAGE

_ ?’1«:.»;;GAR, VI PHASE,
* ._ T » _ 8″s’k,E}3«fiAr}1E,{)RE

… APPELLANTS

(BY SR1 MYLARAEAH ASSOCIATES

” SR: 10 M SEDDAMALLAPPA; ADVQCATE)

M] S ORIENTAL INSSRANCE COMPANY LTB
EABJI, NCL232/19, PAVI’§’l”IRA SOUTH
AVENUE 15″ FLOOR, 913 BLOCK
JAYANAGIXR, BANGALORE

SMT. K YASHODA SUBASH

1”»)

W10 SUBASH

MAJOR, R/A N.2821/C,

5% MAW, BANASHANKARE,

2% STAGE, BANGALORE–‘:’-‘8’*– M
i’i:£ES-;’~P€}.E’l-13E§_\¥:_’E’f§

(BY Sm B S UMEsVkI,_AbvGgA%f:: FOR 3:,” 4
SR3 K V”ENKA’fEGOW£)A;..ABVG(T§A?E E?C}3% i’%*’;3}

THIS M.F’.A. :,$ FiLE:)._’u..gs.._V173(:«;..i.C’?v3Mv ACT’
AGAINST THE JU§c;mf;NT~” AN'{3,3x.w;gRI3 E)A’I’E{};3.1i}.G2
PASSED 1N I\«-WC Ni};-496/’f}G§, . c3e’~Ifi”% H13 93:3 (3? THE
LEARNED PRL. Cmi, ‘J§;’}.”) i3’~E (;.;~:_p;’.v:}rsz3’_’_.AN’r3 MAC’I’~IiI,
BANGALDRE =RURAL:” BANGALEDRE, PARTLY
ALLOWWG f§’}’£E ‘1’cL;;zM€ 1.:z§?r1Ti’oj:~a.__F{i:~? CGMPENSATION
ARE SEEK§.T€’.s:§ £§§:r:ANcBzu:EN_'”£* ms c:;j’MpENSAT;0N.

This apj:+¢é§ ‘fieafizig this day, SREEDHAR.
RAD VJ},V”Vde1ixfi%;md” fellowiugi ‘ ‘

‘ ” ~. :

travelling in 22 ictrrya Because of

fl?fi€’}¥’.f9gs._:h and §:£é:’g};5Hg§::3_vi driving, the lorry mrtied, Ifihauanjaya

‘ –,Pam:<§'és have flied f}€fi§0I1 seakiug competnsatietm. The

"'§€';'€.n s§es. R3965/– pm’ Wouid; enurt: ta Elm benefit 9f the

.dé;:§éndants. The age 0f the mother shmslé be cansidered and

V’ ” “:14 multiplier wiii appiy. The iota} loss of ciepenfiezxcy Wauid

be 33.15: /—{9Q{){inCom6:} X 12(moz1ths} X 14(mu1tip3:i€7:}.

The petitioners am entitled to Rs.25000/– towasiié ” _
expectancy and Rs.1000O/– toWardsVf\;1»1era}- ‘4
the petitioners are entitled to
Rs.186~’L0O/- as against awatdefi;
tzibunal. On the enhanced ‘v’t:I1¢: }inteIest
payable is et 6% pa.’ ‘the i)eiei1:io:1 till

The péséenger in a’ goods
vehicle. in case in Baljith Kaufs
case pay the compensation
with Accordingly the appeal
is dispe-§edV “V above.

” ….. Sd/…

Iudge

Sd/-

Fudge