IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
Dated: 11th day of March 2oo9_ %f j=
Present "
THE HONBLE M1'.JUSTICE;\{,(}OPA};A" H E
And '
HoN*B:.E Mr.JUS'I'iCE4'~N;"ANANI3A % ' by %
M.F.A No.8726¥32007v.IEifV;..144, _ '
Shub}3aramL fliompicigz, M. £1; Road,
Bangaior¢- 566v-Q01.'
. " By j:s*.:;;)¢g'~:zty Ma:"1ag€:_r,« .APPELLAN'I'
A ~ _ '(By 'S311 .i;I':S.._Liz1ga1'aj, Ariv.)
1. Jéiyafiznié,
AA W/0.'Sé'.§1na Rama Naik,
* V Rfa Byrapura Thandya,
fffihikkanayakanahafli,
Wumkur District.
2. Prakash, major,
Fa{he1"'s Name net known,
Proprietor, Prakash Meters,
Chikkanayakanahalii,
Tumkur District. ...RESPOI\IDEN'£'S
(By M] sfiamsa Ksheera Assts. Acivs. far E2 1)
In M1"-'A Crab 110.469] 07:
Between:
Jayamma,
W/o.SanI1a Rama Naik,
R] a Byrapura Thandya,
Chikkanayakanahalli,
Tuznkur District.
V. .
{By M] s.I~iam:3a Ksheem .5&ssts'.'Advs.) E
ANY)
1. National Insmance CQ.1I1:}E?«il}"'VIV.:iJ¥I1i{i.;i'Q»'* .
Regional Ofiicc,' No.1jM, ' " '
shub11axam_' p1ax;. 'Mi Rd
Bangalorp" S-f3__()*-£}{)3}..' _ _
By its «_ '
2
2. ?rakash, major, V , M ~
S / 0. not kndwn to 4:.'n_e flppgilant,
Proprie§:er,LA Prakash Metors,
~ Qhik1;a33zayakanaha§1i,..... .
,_Tm~akm~ Disrrieg. RESPONDENTS
V Lingaraj, Adwfer R1}
' T -- 0 0 0 -
& Cmb are filed under Section
%:.%k1?:u;1) cfme MAI. Act and Order 41 Rule 22 cm
're$pec,:i::ive1y against the Jufignent: and Award
j:i_¥_:_;'9'/3;{2OG? passed by tbs MACE', Bangalcnfe City in
. V [Es{[_\?'{,'...E~Io.2'?55/ 2005.
Thesa M.F'.A 85 Crob coming on for hearing
''before the: Court this day, upon. hearing, A1"1a11d_a, J
deiivered the fol1owi:1g:«
JUDGMENT
This appeal is flied by the
reducfion of {zomperisation varggi CIV:”C§’S_%’%’40¥3j€C*¢i’i;’If% V
by tha ciaimant for 6Ifl}aflC€fiié1%§.’ _ V ‘ V
2. We have 1′ fir flpartic/as
and we have been taken_£1:arou’g1ji.»re’é”0fé£$§;’, ”
3. As” 1:’ec:$19dS”””a:t1d evidence,
claimant ha{dV@ mjufies: ~
” she” Ai:.ja;V1..V;*_f§;z,zPzt’ ‘.?:;§§m;}:-Iegia.
2. “v;éinous thromobosis
of lowséf
wag tube for feeding.
able ta produce only some
” were unoomprehensible,
SE24? totally dependent for bed
transfers, ambulation, activities of
* rcigilg’ living, segf care, bladder and bowel
73
‘ ‘care.
4. The ciaimant was uncier proionged treatment.
x Howsver, her condition did not improve. As a result of
€116 injurics, claimant has fellewilig disabilit:ies:~
ax: %
assessment, which _ si
” 1. Unable to stand or walk without
2. Able to comprehend
questions.
3. Depfmdent an czttenders’AfC;’i.:i-‘A_j éfif
daily living.
4. Slurring ofspeech.
5. Sufism fmm right sidedvffigérni
JFW:
Sheik also undergone. detailed»
L/’ .
express Verbally. _ ____ _
—
–,=.c4)wfs:_ is. ufisble to
The 1!/Iedisail as “the perznanem:
disabilfiy 0f the whO1<:_'b0d§}" 3.7"; é
"T1j1é hasvwéisarded csmpsnsation sf
Rs. 1o,<33%;eQ°e mmvmg heads»
Suf"fsri13£?;" ' X
2.
8:
9
1
.
Loss of ii’1C()IIj1=E3 Cigxring the
bf treatment.
. I\3{¢Tc¥.ica31’E’;x}:5€’nses
..’,,’Lg0’ss'”af f¥,1tti:~’€*: earxxing
6:’ anaexfities
– »Atte:n5(iar1t’s charges
.’-N:>11:’i;=;hmeI1t & diet
. Uflhappiness 85 frustration
Transgsrtatiom 8?; Conveyance
. Future Medical expenses
Tots}
Rs.
Rs.
39,900/~
30,009/»
Rs.3,05,000/~
Rs.3,88,000/-
Rs.
Rs.
Rs.
Rs.
Rs. 15:6§,os5,I-
60,000/–
15,000/-
30,060/–
35,000]-
35,000/–
25,000/»~
only ._ 3 T
ta her conditien and the further compiicatigfixs
she is likely to be deveiop, we e.zv:9md Qf
Rs.75,{)0O/»- for future medical tfeatifieiit g
Rs.25,GO()/«awarded by A
11. In the res111t:,..1:}1e
company is §iS1’I1iSS6d. is acmpted
in part ” enhanced to
RS’ 1
“ftIf1;’4;$,at1V§c%:si””‘curj£%1pensa.tion under the
head we decline ho award
izatersst thémun. . campany shal} deposit
” “.th€”§i;kI13;nC€d coriljistaxzsation within four weeks frorn the
dagger; or “award.
Sd/”‘
Iudqe
Sd/6
Tuégé
MP