1 IN THE SIGN COURT 0? KRRNATAKR.AT BRNGRLQRE EATED THES THE 2?"'DAX OF JANUARY 29e§¢f3 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. Juswzca K sggfiaaégaaag, a AND.._ THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTEC§R$}N,S§§Y$NARAEANA MmLfi;g$gé®gqQ_ BETWEEN NATIONAL Imaaufixcg CQ.gL?a"~A'$»-N§ ARYA sAMAJ.RoA§;w:* __1gz »-3. opp MUN1cIPALFMARKET'u}.'._; 2 KAROL BA§H;»xEWgpBL§IV11§.Q05; R/BE ITS axxasgkfi" "" '"" '. . 'v w"« . APPELLANT {By sri;_G_MAHESH;:fiEY§" *-W; . 'SM? SABKU§T'i£" _ W/G SGDHAKARA §0oJAR¥ "~.32_Y3ARs~. -_ Rf§ ERRED? VILLAGE, .'~EARAB$ POST a_UQU§: $ALaK D.K. "*= *2 fiasfga PRAMQQH '*«_5fQ 3uDHAKARA PGGJARY 'MINaR,19 YEARS "Rik HARADY vI;LAGE, HARADY pas? wavy: TALUK 0.x. RXBY MGTHER SAHKUNTALA \ c>/ V} 2 3 MASTER PRAJWAL SXO SUDHAKARA POGJARY 7 YEARS, MINOR R/A HARADY VELLAGE, HARADY POST UDUPI TAL§K D.K. ,~w- R/BY MOTHER SAHKURTALA 4 SMT.3ALAJA W/O GOPALA POOJARY 57 YEARS R/A HARADY VILLAGE, HARADY 903? '_ UDUPI TALUK D.H,f 5 M/S sac RQRDWAYSW{REGB)u No.21/245;;,BAs?1,"; 4'.V, , puwsaazflwfposafimaaa" ",'-"-W» ROAD,*DELHIp110j0O?, x'wv 5 VIJAYAEKfiMfiR_SAG.RAM«DASS MA30R"~3. %* -.% H;NO,340fTSP"NAGARg' BELTALL sUHAT1;."= ASSAM - ' "*'." "u RESPONDENTS
-*._ gay syi: A A$fiflBmSfiETTY, ADV., FGR R~1 TO 4 )
THES ,&EA IS FILED 3/s 173(1) OF Mv ACT
AG3ixsTa_THE_ JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:13.12.02
PASSED IN MVC*§O.641/96 0N THE FILE 0? THE ADDL.
CITE CIVIL sunsa (SR.DN) AND AQDL. MACT, UD§?I,
PARTL¥.f AfiLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR
COMPEMSATION.
x’*.:HIs APPEAL COMING am FOR HEARING THIS DAY,
; 3R£Efifl3R R80 J} DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
4
of the dependents. The total loss of depenfleney
would be R3.3.6O.OOO/” (Rs.2ooo(in§5méyge7¢ee
12(months)’ x l5{multiplier). Tee *wife. le”
entitled to Rs.25,000/- fl t§Qa;&g’fnl§ssxe”§fl
consortium. The petitioners . together: °afe ti
entitled to Rs.25,eoa/afi*.to§arag«f¥l$;§W of
e$?@ctanCY and Rs¢§0,C0§/td’#tQwatfle”‘”funeral
expenses. In all, the §e§itl§5§:§’;re entitled
to Rs.4,2o,opo3~_ ag”W§g%ln§tf;3§}3;in,500/– with
interest at~§%_§;aL”@ye§ded5b§ the Tribunal.
Ont lthenn efifianéefi cenfiengation, interest
payable _iS, at ‘€%ltpefmlennum from the date of
Qetition tlll’payment§>i
“”fhe” “.T€ibunel has awaréed lessor
ltompensatldnfa Hence, the appeal for reductlen of
the gempensation does net arise. Accordingly,
Vnpggeil is dismissed.
Eefigg
Salfw
E
TL_ Eeege