S' "Aged«--.6'7
IN THE HEGH C(.)URT c)F1<)j9_«}MS~SS.%%
BEF()RE:
THE HON' BLE MR. JUSTECE A.r~:Am) A'
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL O'i=1éu«:}8
BETWEEN:
Nati011a1 IE1SLll'£1!}C€ C(I}lT1pL1RI1~_\,jLiITli[€d,=- jé
Regional ()ffice._ _
No.§44. SubEm1'am1Compicx. _ '
MG. Road. . .
Bzlngalorc ~«~«
Representecl by' iE."~:__ A~ai-figixi i:'~:{1¢t;=}ii*'xsc <L')fi5iV_L'c3V1f '
Sm. D. K2:1'tIii..Ig:.1'ii._f'_ " ._ A APPELLANT
( By Sim} . - See'i'i1;:1j;iim1' .,Ar:i-Voczzie)
AND:'
S hri. _\_§"e i1E~:e1ta11'a1:fia1A13_;:ppa1, V
_ Slot -! ._;1£r3., VKeV1'np&~iz1_Ia.
AF-'.CSj'_i-ii t'1'g_._a}'r--: "C h-ii; is; 21 Allkama h a 11 i V i 11:1 ge.
B~a:1g:i:*pet T--;§"Et:i<}=
REESPONDENT
_(}SE.a1jSiL.ML;S%'1ia<;} Ahmed, Adx-*()ca['c: fo1'z"c:SpondenE)
I: 4' :§* -5-' -P
, ,' m .,x
'£
This Miseel}ane0L1s First Appezzl is féked under Section
i73( 1) of {he 9»-"iL)tor V'ehicle;.x' Act. 1988, against the judgzment and
zlwarci dated ()5.()9.2()()7 p21h'SCd in MVC N0.732l/2006 ontfhe fiie
of V Additional }LIdge. CoL:1't of Small Causes Member.
Bangalore. SCCH-20, zswarding ea')111pe:'1szui<)n of _Rs;2',f"'3;(}U_{'}/'1.
with interest at 6% per annum from the date pveiivtiefi .t i}i
depos it.
This Appeal coming on foa" ('}.14'('1t'3£_'.*'.'e.I~?}iS*..d£éyV;"[.}1'c: '-.C(:31j_:"{
deiiveredthe f0l!0wing:«~ ' " 'V " * * "
J U D G _T
The appeal C()l}1iI]g'__(5.fi,. fo1'.';;td;_ni's..~':_1mi'Es considered for final.
dispmzzl llaving 1"ega1'd lo {h.(?.fi.'iC-[S a._mi_Lsifeu1é*:'::;'{¢;'ices.
9. T115 21p"pe1ii1fif: ,is§'~.jj:he"-i_n"s,ufe1' 01" an offending vehicle
i11vL)lve.:i--~2;1_Vecei§fe~n{Q~wi1e§'eby the appeilzmt had suffered
four f1-ac{u1"e--:s4_ 21nd AE1o~sVp'Efe.a:iized for at considerable period of
.._Ii.Ine..~§éx c:'ie.-Em peti~I.ie0V_r1 \2~:a$ lodged hc3f0:'e the Motor Aceideni
:}a.i':*n,..si T.!_fi'{3!.!'I1vhl'1z.'THC Tl'ibLlE'EZi} l]L"1V'il}g aiwarded :1 Eotai su:"1'1 of
R5:2,'7'f*§&.()()()f;;'jjeeVztppelianl is before mm Court chzillenging the
The counsel for the appeiizmt would point out then {he
Trjbuxlal hzls awardeél geelefifis and cx0rbita1nt amounts under the
L".
seveml heads of e0mpensa1t'i0n. The iespmident has not produced
titty materiui to .s'Ei0w that he was an zigi'ieuEtui'ist or 3 milk yeiidtii'
or that he wars earriiiig any motiey either as an agi'ieu1tL11'-is":_ft'<)m
miik vending bUSi!1t3SS. However, the Ti'ibiinaE--f_has-_t:1ken.Via
tmtional income of the zippeliamt as R.j;L¥i;'(}{}{)/7 ;'l'l1{1_:«h_elS' '.pi'tie*eede'<;i
to grant ioss of income during the hlid-".Jp"'{)_('"5l'i()d 'i'i;'~.§t' et'i.ri'$'Vi'(i'ei"z1b]e period. the zimount
awarded tewziifds attteiigiziiiittqiiti.ezinveytinee charges at Rs.27,(.)(.)0/--
was not .suppt"i'i'te_d zmiy rti2ite1'iaE. Hence, the Same is arbitrary
ittzci I135' iiestiltetj in genert>u:~; eoiiipeiiszititiii being granted to the
2::'me«]'l;ttit;-who Eiit-.9;.--i"itit roduceci ztiw 3i"0t>ftt> the same.
iii'*_'m;'diti0n, the Tribunat has ztiso granted Rs.5,50()/--
"tti_Ax>v'.;.1_V1fdEs' nourishment. this 11215 not tmiy duplicated the
5
assuming that the :'espm1cfem has; failed in produce him in support
of the me.cficz1| expenses, the Tribunal} ougln to have 'taken 21
jucficinl notice as to {he nature of the injuries unci t_h.¢"})e.':'ie.'agi"of
treamhem that the respondent had under5_;m1e .Vi_11"'a.Vw'af(i~ing {the b'
medicai expenses and that the szlxuie
subsh-1r1ti;1i|}-I. V ‘
7. The counsel for the submit
that in the light of the 1\~¢tV&f*…_”{‘:,\.;z;[A hashhnet filed any
biiis, this Court :”1my 1ul<e.V.:m–:.ir.::e <5"i'T1:he 'c'iV:fc;{i'uSta1nce in deciding
the a1wa11'g:i'."L1E¢' 'cl/IlV_.}:5f.IIl£1'1:§;iVi"1£1.}"i}j1i£.)L£I}f_"3'WLEI'd€d is :1: the discretion of
the T1'ibuh:1i.« Any "tj_hveT1*'«.;iTi'1d4.-'a1b0ve amount that has been
CLll']'}Ll]i'§{.§\"'t'i_\g' (gz"u;1.11Ecd .'~w=dui('lT he .<;et-ouE by this iow amouni of
iiiedithai e3{;j)e1is£:As than is z1wz=n'ded and therefore would submit' that
the LI'!'}'1()iL|I'iI$"gI'Ll are in order and does not warram interference
_ <)f'1I1i§"~CT<)Lii'f. *
.' . _ 8. "Given the above fzlcis and ciaunmstzmces. the Tribunai
-_\-v9a._sV’m)’t jL1stEfied in zzchwptinlg R.<;_4,()(}()/« as income in caiculating
3
(3
compen..\”a1t’i0n towards loss of future earning, in {he absence of
evidence. However, given the data: of accident and ;1ssI.4’m..i:i’:g’Eh:-it
t.h<~: appellant was an ubl<:–b0died man though he \~=.';1;§'– :t'i";<3 '
income has to be reduced ailcast to Rs-.'3;'5'{)()/–, fin w_\ii1 3c!§_ evem; 1}}:
loss of future earning would ha 12"
22%) by adopting appropriate 111L:!i’%p lic’1′ wl1iCh_w1:.ici be 7 instead
of 9.
9. f~'L1a'ti1 'e1'.1 El1je laid--up period Computed for? Notwithstanding the it is appmpriate 10 gram
loss of iz{c»:A);{1aa {hr months. Hence, the .~_;ame shali
siand ré.(,1uced io Rs; .1.’-“.E«,(.)A()”{.)/V–A”filxtezaci of Rs.56,(‘)(‘)()/–.
l’°().a._’-~. IV-nx:sc.>fa1r é1$””c0mpensation towards attendant and
‘VC-a)riyf.:_s?zinfife,C’hi1’a=gé.s is also without xnat&::’ia! placed before the
cm1i’t”~..__z1nd>th_§i)$a1;11c stands reduced to Rs.E(),(__){_)()/– instead of
K V 2,! m<';,r–§L
5
Insofar as medical expenses is etmeemed. t’hot.zgl1 it is on
the lower $ide the 1’1111()LEnl granted t()Wt11′(I…\’ pain and s.uf7tfet«*.i_ngVV at
Rx.65.(){)()/~ wotticl batlttnce the same anti tI1e:~c’:a’i’:~_tfe’7 thtfife-:”i’f~f:.’I’i£)
WLl1’E’a11l for ittte:’1″e:’ence in respect of ()H1″t§I”21lTl()tt11[$Vtltit.(::)1’tt::3}§n€§c§.
II. The ztvvtttxi stands 11’l()d§fit;’vL4}t_i1:’:’~_l€l’mS.’£}S”L2bc1)V;C_..”T§’tC_V
tesponcient wouid thus be e’:tti”t!ed ft)”.VC’€),t0f2]j)€.ET>S£1tVtC)n of
Rs.l,64.!8()/– (00,000 + ft0..000.=4}5;Stt>tt’jf+_10,000 at 14000 +
64,68(‘)) instead of Rs.2,73,VQ(_)(‘)/._–V tlterettn as awarded
by the Ta’ibun;tl.%,,/V
Tithe” pei.-tihif, stat tiei at lit) ;1.t;’t:0;~tt i n g! y.
Theittzttottttt ineietms_it’-..éh.–~excess of the entitlement to the
i'(3SpL)11d.€_E’l[ \2veul,gt bet.’-reft.1nAded to the appeilztnt and the amount
“t*e.tna’i”nihgf’shz1″ii.«be wétthtdtttwn by the clttimttnt / respondent.
Sdf-3:
Judge