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