- -- -4wwmuamm~r=nwn»mwwv~Vvrmnxnnawnww*nwew"t:vUx'Wwr*'Iin3cNR1"n'ltI""'f!!GH'C'O'UI'l"OF"*lOl!flfiTKKK'""'HiGHi
_1_
IN ms HIGH ccmm u'I'37 YEARS: , . V
R10 DODDALAHALLIVILLAGeE'.;_..
H0BI£'A"'Tv '-2:. " b
BANGALORE RUHALm".s'r::ac1t.j-~.. »J. _',_AFFELI.-ANT
(BY: SR1'K,L;VSRfii'Efiflffi5i'_ADV.,}
" '
310-HoERE~G,c-s§r22!£T~-v»...~
Rm GEWDAPUEEA vmasseg
' 'HALAGIiR. H0311 ' '
Id-AIAVALLI mug
- -. ..jj.MA2mYA 1>Ia*I*mc'r.5714m.
' INSURANCE camamr LTD.
* _m1zn":{a-5714o1
* $X1frS7lEARAGER. ...Rn:s1=c>1wnm'rs
(BY: SR3 P.B.RAJU, A.L'3V., FGR R-2
Notice to R4
-1. -.--- -u--- uppyu-n- urn: -1r-u-u'rIIr1IIr-
-lunar' BIJUHI \.l'l' l\D|l'|I'l-Illilll-I TIISDFI I-\)I3K' U3' KARI'!-\§AKA HIGH '
g__ 2 _.
THIS LEA FILED UJS 173(1) 0?
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD"--
31.1.2007 mssan Bl MVC Ho.224j99
or TI-IE ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (SDJ as MACT, Mmma;
PARTLY ALIDWING THE CLAIM FOR"
conmnmnon AND sazxmé" E1'fl_-IANaCE;&I!3BT7'OI€'
conmusnnoa. * *
Tms MFA CoMnIG";GI€..VFdR Anmsszam A %
my um cam DELlVERE"fl_"I'}fi3V F0L1gGwmg;:-
ibr Admiaaion,
with the on both sidm,
by the injured claimant
' * _ A.enfié1ic-ement of caznpenaation by
judgment and award passed in
M.\(.c,r:é:.¢'32%+/99 dam-:d:31.1.07 by MACT, at
2. The relevant hats of the case are that on
16.2.1999 at 11.45 a.n1., the claimant alongwith
/I7.
---- vr --W--HM mun-I count or-' KARNATAKA HIGH ¢
another person were travelling in a
No.CNG-9720, when the driver of the
the bus in a rash and I1v_egh'.g,§nt_"
consequently it dashed ;,~
a. result the claimant
sustained injury. at
Primary I-laalth shifted to
General that he has
austainetti tan account of the
aocidhntaith --o'1aJm' ant filed the ola.un'
petitiort of compensation on
of notice from the tribunal, the
resifpctitient-owner of the vehicle did not appear
placed exparte, while the second
-' tgéfiphndent insurance company appcarad and filed
" written statement denying the avermcnts made
in the claim petition and sought for dismissal of the
5»
-non':-v -u\rI.v-u- 11- -nrwIn-'ruIrm-sr-
-..v.- g_.,-.f..m- \o& .u-m.w-n.v- nuun uvune ur uuumnnunnn ruurv uuulu Ur Iunxwnlnlsn HIUH (.00!!! OF KARNATAKA HIGH I
-~ 4 -
claim petition. The said claim petititgxni
connected with MVC No.225/99 filed
injured claim' ant. On the _bas_i§ ' V
pluad.u1g' 3, the tribunal J
for its considcmticrn:-
1.
Whether thia.V:mt:it§cV:§r1fii”*«}’pgr:§§vr:a that the
accidnnt at
1 1 .45′ éiddépmawfluakm mad
and negligent
%%%% No.CNG-
and the petitioner
A in that accident?
W}1efi1e1*~~~~thc petitioner is entitled for
If so, how much and
Z ‘V ‘ ‘Wham?
AA 1 What ordter or award?
4. In support of his case, the claimant
examined himself an PW-1 and Dnmariswamy as
/1»
/’
. …… ……….. III nu-uuinlnnfl ruurl LUUIIT OF KARNATAKA HIGH (
– 5 –
PW-3 and got marked Exs-P1, P3 to P7, 1=a%t;:y%%jP12
and Ex:-P13, 14 & 15 and Em-P16 to %
basis ofthe aromajd materia:.1,~th..e ‘
compensation of Rs.76,6{J0/
rate of 6% p.a. fi’om the of V
date of1ea1fi1sa’ flon.._1§gt being%a¢[fiafied*w1mm said
quantum of V Ikslaimant has
” c:3ti;:ase1 fiat the appellant
and l é:a.fnci:i« the second rmpondsent
” fii.’-.1t” on behalf cf the appellant
sustained fracture of L5 Var-tcbra
o$J1e.#§”§ixnp1c injuries and PW~3-Doctor was
im in respect of the disability sustained by
_ claimant. However, the tribunal ordered 3.
” mixleager compensation on the head of ‘pa.u1’ and
/”
—- – -uwrv- uogrunuvv
wu -v-nu urur-nv- -uv-T \o\dIJl|’ VI’ IV-|l\l’i\lI-|l\.l’| PIIVJI” LUUKI I)!’ KAKNAIAKA HIGH ‘
— 6 —
suffering” and “loss of amerfifies”. He,»
submits that the enhanced compenaatioti’
ordered on those two heads. A
6. Per-contra, oouneel £9: vthe”
oompany by supporting award
submits that there was one
grevioua fiiszjuxies. the
amount and suffering’
is of any material,
no ‘can be aufarded in the
regard to the rival submission on
only point that arises for my
eoneirlerafion is an to whether the appellant is
r x.AAe:1_ti:t’led to additional compensation.
8. From the material on record, it is evident
that the appellant had sustained Eracture of L5
fie
– — -u-vs 1–un:–u-‘rs
-I uvnri I. \.u\-FIJ’l\I \lI’ l\PIKI’f'”‘\n” c
.. 7 –
Vertebra and PW-3 Doctor has opined that}
was disability to an extent of 10% to
and that he was also admittevdtaa mg mg’
conaidering that fact that
back bone, there. would Vconhidgrahiu
auifering. Undér is
entitled to «at Ra.14,ooo;–
on the the
fact of 10% and no
_ awarded on the head “Inns
of is awarded a sum of
, na.1s,ooe;. oh ‘flV’1v¢:_\_ht:ad ‘loss of amenities’, thcrcby
to Rs.29,000f- which is
to m.3o,ooo/«. The enhanced
V”‘~.-v4.._’__’s:>ompef1:,|£s__&tion of Ra.30,000[– shall carry interest at
4’ of 6% p.a.. 011 deposit of such
‘:’14’é:V’=:x:it1penaation, the same shall be released to the