High Court Karnataka High Court

Patric Domnic Rozario S/O Vincent … vs V P Sadashiva S/O Pemmaiah on 2 November, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Patric Domnic Rozario S/O Vincent … vs V P Sadashiva S/O Pemmaiah on 2 November, 2010
Author: Dr.K.Bhakthavatsala

31 THE HIGH CCIRIRT OF’ KARNATALKA AT

rwrmm mm Tim 2% mm are Kavsnmanémlkg ~

EEFGRE

THE HOEPBLE 13:. .ms_-rues

£

PATRIC DOHRIC muzamo –_
szovmcmrrnmamn ” – %
man 33 mm

cczzrrmcma % % _ ;

KALATKI§B.DUV1i.L§;.$:’E
anmamx ms’: . %
smrm KEJEIEGU V ‘-” ‘-

av: sm. a, K ‘a:.J’rs ?s3a*a*Axna, A£W8.}

AHB

_ L c::;A1=*r..v

….. ..’
. RG35′: svvxaks
VILIAGE AH!) mm’

‘ ‘$t)I.I’m ‘§£0.2)AG»II

“ME-zééx
S!’-{I momma,

AP?ELI.AR”I’

V’ x VTLRGKE) 523031′? 41 YEAE, OQi;’UPfi’1°I{}N: DEWER,

” V “Efi.IA’i7HM6.DY, AMMNIEI TDWK ART)
V PEST EOBAGZE DIS’£’RIC°’I’.

» a’x’sm$m:asn;mm:a:Lanv,)

mm mm 23 msna 1313 1739} cm Lav am fiGhBIS’I»’j5.HE
Jtmrsamrzw sum AWARD 13A’1’EI}:i’?.?.G3 FAESEB
flC3.$1j0fl as mm FILE cm ma emu. amen @2«.~m?§3..ggKn,_”
mm, vmmpmz. mm? mwwme THE 1’mV’T1″:’i:33,§~A___ _
FOR cemmsansx mm swims cm
commssrrxcrx. i ‘ ._

mm mm; come am” 302%

THE CGURT §ELIVEEE33 THE
JV’)? 3 ‘
mm ‘m an apw1 ii1¢d %u§asa~%jL%3§¢;,%L173(:; of Motor

Vehiclaas Act

17/7; 2003 the fila of the
Civil
fiar the appeflant.

‘rm H92, the owmzr cf th-£2

31;}; ‘ ragga’ u*at;3;onKa.C1′?K-5139,

itxgthjd’ cZ!afm ” — ”

brief facm ef the {$86 heading to the

‘V V’ ail is an under:

m rwpandmt No.1 hmin filed a claim petiticn

. urder Secnlfié :2:fMVAct, 1988, seekirg czsompexmatisn

L

ofRs.10,19,’?’20/- flow. the dram’ anti owrmr of the

mwards parwnal suatained by 112111 in ”

accident that occurred an 6151 1999. It
due m rash and t

tmpomient No.1, it came V’

cycla mamng Ha. mmmafizésasa
rwpomient Raul _a ridar
and t& c}a1mam:’ M ‘ in the
motor aecidfinifl petifion far
:91’ the 19:13! mtcred

of ohjectioms. The

many as 5 issuas. ‘I’§:ue partim

support cf tha case of the ciaimant, ha

V to marked EXP} ta P24. X-my reperts

K as Ex.C1 2:3 C38-C3. In rehutral, the owner of

got hm:-,1: mmszmd as KW-1, b-mam

3 KW-2 11: R’W-4 amd gut nmrfimd mpy 9f the

degwsfiian am. sketch in C.(‘.’..Re.95.3l99 as EXDI am

S2. ‘I’l1eT:.*i3:mna1 rm amwerefi issue 210.1 an the paint

af , in the afirmaive in favmzr offhe:
anfl wax’ ‘1: the ciriver and earner of the Icriif.

No.2 was aztsawmed in the 2

driver am awnfl of the

axzcident occurred starkly ragsh’ V’ t
drisfi of the matter Ifi3a”ue’;§” 3
& 4 wan
at Ra.5o,oocq4’*~%%k %% aufiarixm,
R3.20,€’3lZ}OI -5 rmméahmram,
expcmw am!” a

sum of has of Thus

the: .. fiwmtiad compensation af

‘ fixtmmt at ‘aha rate af 6% pa, in

agaimt the rmpondenzw 1 as 2,

ho1di::g s.mjoi:1t1y and gammy Bahia its my

« .. 4 , ai5%n:

is appmx.

4. The appeilam’. baa chelisci the quantum

sf mmpensafiem It is mntcndw that eomgmxaatiwn of

I

Rs.1,€)$,0E00i- awarfled inwards. Ems ef msnitiea 7:a~”::–=:1

the h¥1ghm* 55513.

5. Laarmed Gamma} for z§’i*1é’ V

‘ – – sumim that the quail.

awarded by the Tribunal dcm§ for

5. 1:; is the case efiixe rm
grievous Ex.P3 -.

weunci mm right
supra the mehm 2 3: 2
emé; ever Iafc thigh with
abnormal’ am the saga: 1% with

V. £he.19€«§r¢r vane third; swellm ova: tha Eeii:

wanna am’ the right elbew and to the

411′? ‘lhezrc was difiused mmhra}. oedema;

neck of the ldt fiemur, fi-acirure of

‘ ‘~%§*g.§b§:*aehan1m regon at’ famxzr; mmminutecl flacture at

and me right %u1a and comminutevd fractum af

, ciavioie. As par ma rwcvrds plamd before that:

3 the claimam was admitted to City Hxzzagfial

L

Rweareh & Diawstie Cmter, Manfira, wime h: was

mm as inpatimt an 14/611999. H

clamrh 1: was almw tn Cafind –

Ex.P5 $3 the dkzzzhaxge

mm in ms City rmpizal fgfiflfi

EXPI3 is madinal case V.
Hoapitsl. Jabalpur. was
mwmmmded to :;:f 31
(T-2’i~+24r} ” Work under
5upe:v?mig);;_1 and mt ta
A3 pm’ the mdimi

wéflm with a limp an the 1%: aide

g5m¥m~_1:mb. As per Ex.P14= aam lgaxzeoe, thus

, military &ut§$ in plexus” and hiik

__ . 4 but not fit for military dutim in
. figgaaga and mum long mashing (mm: 5

fit?-W Wm’ axxmre’ bmtilitm fimunim’ kmmgem

H ‘ ‘V ” etc.)tu1& for arawfilmg amijuz:r:q:m:g’ .

L

3*’. TmTfibwflafiw fimaM§

1mtez’1ak’ , ms 3:123 that the ch3ma13:£’ has

prmpeom, but rejected that eentamtisan that K

has got pmmarlerxt d?1sab@m11: J

‘IE claimant has eiaimw mmgmmatfien cf

mwands damw no the xmtor’ M
has ma that he waa 1′ _ca@iéc¥mati0n
mwanis dame he that he
did not mducé, docummts.

8. at perk:-d of
diaabifitim rntxticted, the

Trfiurgal cacrmpfimation of

and s , Ra.20,0(3€¥{-

naurfihmnt, atzteztidant charw

azcpeztmes and a sum of

towards has surf Thus the

VA has awarded ncmpensatinn of Rs.1,7C3,a)G/-

uakcefi with reasonable ‘waters.-at at ‘(ha rate sf 6% p..a_. In

opirxirm, the said vmmwmaaticn awazxiw by the

L