Sri. 'pgnd:L;ai 7e'1jshwar Bhat, Advocate] éj:1.«..NH:fionH'I..'Insurance Co., Ltd., " ._ __'IjTr.K. District, IN THE HIGH COURT or-* KARNATAKA AT V. DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF NOVEMBHT2, H .-PRESENT.» >4 4' THE I-ION'BLE THE I-ION'BLE ;\/1R.JLfsTieE'H,s.HE1wz19ANi§A M.F.A. CROB.-- 'No, :58-. M;I§.A.No;" :32 .oF':2..Qn5 (Mm M.F.A. CROB. No, Between: Mahesh Shetty, : -- . S/ 0. Late Srmivas SheLty';..V Aged: 38 years,.__ _ Janatha Colony;-._V Palike Vittla», F _ Kasaba Vi~i.1age' 8; Post," _____ .. v Ban'twal'Ta11i'k', % _ DLK. Dismfct, _ H v V ...Cr0ss Objector __ __I1_.F1nor,'AGanesh Building, -«.B.C.R0ad, » ..I32i'r1'twaI Taluk, Represented by its z MWIWMIM E And: 1. Mahesh Shetty, S/0. Late Srinivasa Shetty @ Thlmmappa Shetty, ._ Now aged about 37 years, Jariatha Colony, Palike Vittla, Kasba Village & Post, Bantwal Taluk, D. K. 2. S.M.Hakeem, S/0. Ummarabba, Age: Major, H.No.1--164. Seemiyath Bottukere, 2 " ' .. » Adoor Post, Manga1__Qre'.~ . ' it " a. 5. ...Respondents
[By Sri. Futidikaid Istivifar ;I;3hat,£AdVocate for R1;
R2 served but etnrepresented]
=l=****$*
»A filed U/S 173(1) of MV Act against the
“3udgmer;t_”a.na amrd dated: 20/08/2004 passed in MVC No.
lU~78/i’999.’CnV’the file of the II Addl. District Judge and
Member, 1j\’£A(Z_T–III, D.K, Mangalore, awarding compensation
V «of ?6,92′,.QOD/~ with an interest at 8% and set aside the
is-ame. ” *
x _ “T118 MFA Crab. and MFA coming on for Hearing this
dingy, N.K. PATIL J, delivered the following:
%;
I
I
10
the Tribunal is inadequate and it needs to be enhanced.
It is not in dispute that, on account of the injuries
sustained by the claimant, he has taken
inpatient for 139 days, underwent one….sVu’i°gery:
during the said period he rr1ight__ have fiunderWent”‘~pain .l
and agony, spent reasonablel’gainoueint’ vitvowards
conveyance and other thereafter,
he has taken follow rest for eight
months . The PW2–Doc’tor« clinical and
radiologicai ankylosed right
wrist tolthe’ exte1V_i’tA:.:C)’fll§j’3’5:C:”‘/0′;”absence of half of the right
palm 5 and little and functionless fingers of
cut and fibrosed, the medical
eValIuatiori«.vV”lof:’-permanent physical irnpatirement was
_ done; .._”‘Ftufther, the cross examination of the PW2
revetals that disability noticed is nothing but a below
elblowllacmputation, it is purely a medical condition and
T itis not the case that muscles strength in the palm and
_’w_M_v__.,..»«
it in the fingers of the fiht upper limb were not tested
i”
and it is only on their test percentage of disability is
fixed. The Doctor has deposed that claimant cannot
close his four fingers (right hand] and by
right hand, he cannot lift any object and d_ri’.re”l 9
the vehicle. After reappreciationyaof evgid4ence’V.ofp__’the
Doctor and having regard to -agvocation, age”a’nd_vna_t§ure
of injuries sustained by the ‘ciairn.ant,2 l_re–avsses the
permanent disability at.lEf’O9/o”._ i __l00% assessed
by the Tribunal. andptlivihsifdisability permanent in
the vehicle as he was
doing earlier, ‘E’h_e has adopted the Multiplier
of ’16”,–»the sVanV1he’is justvand reasonable and we accept
is the submission of the learned counsel for
I claimant was aged about 32 years,
_ wor’kingV«__’as-all driver and getting the income of more than
$1,000/V4″ per month. But he has neither produced any
dlocluinentary evidence nor examined his owner or
T “employer to prove the same. Therefore, we do not find
any force or substance the above submission. The
:5′ ,..—–»-“”°”#Ffl’j
Tribunal has assessed the income of the claimant at
?’3,000/~ per month, the same is just and rea;s’o.nah’!e
and we accept the same. Further, it has crifineé, ~
evidence of the Doctor that, the*tte1a.imant’Vireoxuiredj,to._
undergo one more minor surgery ‘and it mayteost
amount. Therefore, these into it
consideration, We award a «suini’of”-$130,(jO()–,a_.»v’toWards
pain and sufferings,’ VA ,”_agai__nst medical
expenses, COD=V’€’yE1_flC€:,;_ np:j».rashi:dg~,f¢da and attendant
charges, tttt ioss of amenities,
discomforts” %and_.”unthéaopiiiess, ?°2,88,000/– towards
loss future-.ineome’ (%3,ooo/- x 12 x 16 x 50/100)
V. future medical expenses.
“i’v'”‘.rVih”11nai has awarded a sum of ?°24,000/-
_ towards.._”1os.s”‘ of income during the period of treatment,
is'”j:ust and reasonable and therefore, it does not
eaII”for interference. %
é’
13
10. In so far as the reliance placed by the”
counsel for the claimant are concerned, V”
dispute with regard to the law laiddown
Bench of this Court in the aforesaid ~_
and circumstances of the are applicable
to the case on hand pptherefohrepltllrey are helpful
to the claimant.
11. For the impugned
judgmer1.t_.and..pa\K}’ard passed ‘oytthle Tribunal is liable to
be modified. ..c0rrip_ensation payable comes to
?4,57,000_/- axndthe is as follows:
flow-ardsand sufferings ? 60,000 / –
* x H attendant charges
._ ” T9ward’s._ loss’ of?’inco1ne during the 2′ 24,000/ –
_ t pgiod of treatment
‘Tovxfards lossof amenities of life
4%
Toward–s_ ;inedi’ca_l expenses, 30,000/–
con’veya:r1ce.V’vnourishing food and
50.000/-
2,88,000/-
?
V ‘1._’_”‘Tow?a.._1jds”~« future medical expenses 3’ 05,000 / –
‘V TOWa1″ds”loss of future income ?
i . ; 3
Total 4.57.000/*
/4/J
12. Accordingly, the Cross Objection
claimant and the appeal filed by the
disposed of.
The impugned judgment«.etndda’w’é1rd
Tribunal in MVC Non niiodified,
reducing the compens;:£tion.’ to
?4,57,000/– (the reduth:-ed comes to
32,35,000/_J__ r _ ._ W
deposit the remaining
amountvydkxfithd p.a., from the date of
petition till its vitealisationw, within a period of four weeks
reveeipt of a copy of this judgment and
Vmanner of disbursement shall be
“fn’Q1§er_tionately reduced to the extent of the reduction
by this Court.
%/
The statutory deposit made by the insurer shall:
transmitted to the jurisdictional Tribunal imme§iiat.e1$fj
Draw the award. accordingly. I
Tu
tsn*
