IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY 01-' FEBRUAi2f,'J ~ BEFORE TI-IE HON'BLE MR. JUSTI;CE:A.'S. _ M.F.A. No.VS2,:Q'849/A2OO9.VVAV BETWEEN: S' NINGAPPA S/0 MAHANTAPPA A AGE: 43 YEARS, occi: AG1§:1LD4ALSLiDVMI'LK BUSINESS R/O MATALAD1jNN,1, _N0\vRES1DINGSAT VADAGANAL§'_'TQ"8:__DI~STV,;"~KOPPAL.' N % APPELLANT. (BY SR1D.ACHANDRASHEE[I<AP..P.PATIL, ADV) ma -' - _1_ Sm3WSA1N'D1A INASSUEANCE CO.L'I'D., A . "DIVI_S'I~O'NA'L_OFFICE, EDIGA HOSTEL COMPLEX, ".;oPP:'2<:SRf1'cV~ABUS STAND, EELLARY. * ' D~1'ST:' BELLARY. 2. PARAMANANDA S /0 KANNAYYALAL KARWA, . SAGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS 82; OWNER OF A 'CRANE NO: RJ--16/E--O416,R/O NEAR (BY SRLRAVINDRA RMANE, ADV FOR R1 'VEGETABLE MARKET, ELKAL, DIST: BAGALKOT. RESPONDENTS.
R2– NOTICE SERVED)
L
In
MFA FILED U/S 173 or MV ACT AoA1Nsi*THE
JUDGEMENT AND AWARD DATED: 18/~12 /$2008
PASSED IN MVC NO.l99/O8 ON THE FIL:E’~«QVF.c__i’TE;{Ei
ADDLMACT 85 FTC–I, KOPPAL, PARTLY.fAI,iIiQ’W’IN(3 4_
THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION’ .ANvD–«.. A
SEKING ENHANCEMENT FOR C.OMPEN–SA’_FICN_. A A”
THIS APPEAL COMING oixi’-Fo[Ri”ADiv1:sstoNA
DAY, THE couar DELIVERED THoE,_FotLov\riiNo;;fl
The appeI1ant–ciaii.nsr;i_it. enhancement of
the compensation as in MVC
No. 199/2003: iiiei théi,A’dd1;””MACT and FTC-I,
Koppal. disposed of along with
the award in 200/08 the
claimant xthereih .– this Court in MFA.No.
_ 208.438/O9 whichiifi/as: disposed of prior to disposing of
contention which had been urged in
iithflspaid is the same contention in the instant
. case) stitch it is not necessaiy to refer to the
A A ‘ ‘*’C()1’i t9_I’lt1.VC’)1’1.
H2. Hence, keeping in View and in View of the same
“contention urged in the connected appeal in so far as
the income of Rs.3,600/– should. be taken in the instant
A
1:
case. With regard to multiplier even though the age as
reckoned by the Tribunal is contended “:l:asg:’–.fnot
appropriate since the age is indicated as
appeal records, I am of the vievw”‘th-at the
justified in reckoning age as the
the same is based on the certificate :”?Nh’i,cihmvirou1d if
have the assessment the&..age.llgrn.ade medical
practitioner. Therefore; ‘V justified.
Further with:..regard reckoned in the
instant case’, stated at 35 to 40%
to the Though in the
connected’ opinion that 17% is to be
reckoned, in the instanficase considering the nature of
«~.the’-iiijnjury indicated in the wound certificate at EX.P.6
if is slight shortening, the appropriate
disability teas; reckoned is 20%.
the said parameters are reckoned and
cornpensation is re-calculated on the head of loss of
future income at 20% disability, sum of Rs.95,040/–
would be the amount. Since the Tribunal has already
l
4-
awarded Rs.59,4OG/– the balance amount of
Rs.35,640/– would be due to be paid. Further.
instant case considering the nature of inj_t1i=iespii’afid {fin
the period of treatment, some rno»re._amcsunt”Wo111d.have V
to be awarded in the head of 1:*iw:.¢ci:i_cai
nourishment and conveyance”~i.n ac1dit__io’n_to.jtheiiiamiounti”
as awarded by the Tribunal;—«iyfhereforeititonmvake good
the short fail} on the – is awarded.
Therefore, to Rs/15,640/–
with as awarded by the
Triburp]oigi1i;”e~ of Rs.-45,640/– with
interesVt_sih.a11 the Insurance Company
Within a period.o’1″–. from the date of receipt of
«._Copy5i”of,_-t.hiszJudg’e’n1’ent. On deposit, the entire amount
to the claimant.
of the above appeal stands disposed of.
ig.N1’oviorder as to costs.
Sfifé
Iudfi
Vmb/nn