High Court Karnataka High Court

Rajanna vs T Narendra on 21 September, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Rajanna vs T Narendra on 21 September, 2010
Author: B.Sreenivase Gowda
IN1}HEHKHICOURT(H?KARNKDHU&KTBANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 213"' DAY OF SEPTEMBER. 2010

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BSREENIVASE. 

Miscellaneous First Appeal No. 17679 of 

BETWEEN

Rajanna

S / O Kallegowda

Aged about 43 Years,
Agriculturist,

R/O. Doddatekalavatti,
Hosadurga Taluk, V I '

Chitradurga District?  A A

1. T    
A. -- S/O Late Thippeswamy
~  Major " "

' Hosadu-rga,

A  Appellant

 "  L_a2:rn.i Janardharla Nilaya, Kate,

it  Chit'1'a(F;urga District - 577 527.

2. A ..'I;he.Branch Manager

New India Assurance Co. Ltd.,

 Vasavi Circle,
Chitradurga - 577 501.

A  Branch Office, Besides Taluk Office,

... Respondents

[By Sri. N M Handrai, Adv. for R1,
Sri. O. Mahesh, Adv. for R2)

%’

This MFA is filed U/S. 173(1) of MV Act against the
judgment 82: award dated 8/1/2007 passed in MVC
No.280/O5 on the file of the Civil Judge[SD} &.-MACT,
Holalkere, partly allowing the claim petvi_tio_n;_V for
Compensation 8: seeking enhancenientfg of
compensation. ” ‘-

This appeal coming on for

the Court, delivered the following: p_

JUDGMENiV

This appeai is for enhancement of

compensation awarded the

2. Heard frfig ggp¢4i:g:aqgu&ea and xvfih the
Consen.t.vof’ieari1ed for the parties, it
is taicen

3. Ii’o1~.._the eonvenience parties are referred to

asihey are nirefeifrecl to in the claim petition before the

‘ ,Trib Lanai; ‘ H” ._

it of the case are:

z on 14~»10–04, when the claimant along with

it xothuers’ was traveliing in Tempo bearing registration

‘AA”i\To’rI{A–16–9962 as paid passenger, near Kari Meddi

gate, Chithariahatti village, Hosadurga taluk, driver of
Mini lorry bearing registration No. KA–l6–“/986 cam_e in
a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the

Tempo. As a result, the claimant sustained inju.ries.

Hence, he filed a claim petition before

Holalkere, seeking compensation of

Tribunal by impugned judigmentf

awarded compensation of Rs.69l9_5C,/V» interest

6% p.a. Aggrieved by the___l:lC’1-uanturn”‘ofivcorripensation
awarded by the the is in appeal
seeking enha;1.;3Vement”of

5. regarding occurrence of
accident,unegligenceuand liability of the insurer of the

offendging Vel’i’iele_.._..the only point that remains for my

‘ ‘consi.d’er_ation in the appeal is:

‘[Whether the quantum. of

c~o_r’rj1-pensation awarded by the Tribunal is

u just and proper or does it call for
‘v.i.enhancem_ent?

After hearing the learned Counsel for the parties

and perusing the award of the Tribunal. I am of the

%

View that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is
not just and proper, it is on the lower side and therefore

it is deserved to be enhanced.

7. As per wound certificate -~ Ex.P.48, the claimant

has sustained the following injuries:

Fracture of hip/fracture of

right femur and other inj;uries;« ”

Injuries sustained by4_himV”.a1″€ a1so”3cf.ri:dent’;

discharge cards — Ex.P.49 Vdisabilityflgcertificate

– EX. R80, x–ray to and supported by

oral evidenceof the-c1.aimantVV,pan’d vdopctor examined as

P.Ws.,_5 and V6’r¢spe¢ti1–s&_e:y.’ ‘
P.VI.[A,.6 ,–x’ in his evidence has stated,

clairiiaiitv ha’s”‘st1ffered disability of 55.64% to limb and

‘ toyvhole body and issued disability certificate —

.. ‘Cponlsidering the nature of injuries, Rs.43,000/–

it awarded by the Tribunal towards pain and suffering is

%.

just and proper and there is no scope for enhancement

under this head.

9. As Rs.1 1,550/– awarded by the Tribunal towards

medical expenses is as per medical bills

the claimant, the same is just and proper p

it does not call for enhancernen’t’;”‘

10. Claimant was treated

to 1041-04 and from 1ic{i’2;04A’top_ 5–.ii§o59.{foi-“Va: totaled

period of 50 days at-“”CfY};’I={ospita1;-.. ljavangere.

Considering the by the

Trib1.1na1’it’e”wa_rd~s incidental expenses is on the lower
side and ypitis’ dese’mfed”” to be enhanced by another

Rs.’.’3,0.00u/d?» award Rs.10,000/– under this head.

_1″1. ;7C_1airnant is an agriculturist. His income is

it at.~.Rs.3,000/– per month. Nature of injuries

suggest-.A«:that he must have been under rest and

A. treatment for a period of three months. Therefore, a

of Rs.9,000/– is awarded towards loss of income

during laid up period.

12. Considering the disability stated by the doctor, in
addition to certain amount of discomfort _ and

unhappiness which he has to undergo for the his

life, it is just and proper to award a sum pg

towards loss of amenities V-and-.¢ac9_cordi1*igl_Vx, -[it V”-is ‘

award ed.

13. Claimant is aged alio_ut.V_50 years the

eXarr1ination~in-(:hieAf.g. Mult-iVplier”applieahle his age
group is ’13’. Incorriehhofl’ is assessed at
Rs.3,000/ disability stated
by the dgoetor future loss of
incorne r§’i1§§”.r8_4;l240/– [Rs.3,000/– x 18/100
X 12 X133.’ aiiddjit.

j”hus V.’t’lie….C1.3iimant is entitled for the following

‘ V..veom}-gerisationz

‘ 1’; and suffering Rs. 43,000/–
,2} . Medical expenses Rs. 1 1,550/-
. 3} incidental expenses Rs. 10,000/–

*4] Towards loss of income
during laid up period Rs. 9,000/-

5) Towards loss of amenities Rs. 15,000/–

6) Future loss of income Rs. 84,240/–

Total Rs.1.72.790/—

9%’

15. Accordingly the appeal is allowed in part and the
Judgment and award of the Tribunal is modified to the
extent stated herein above. The claimant is entitl_ed for

a total compensation of Rs.1,72,790/–

Rs.69,550/– awarded by the Tribunal :nte:¥és{‘r”yat”~

6% p.a. on the enhan’ced”‘« xhof ti’

Rs.l,O3,240/– from the date petition

date of realisation, excluding.interestfor delayed’

period of 467 days

16. The Insuranceflfloil deposit the

enhanced -amount with interest within
two Inonths froti;lAlthe’*..tdlate of receipt of a copy of this

j13;dgn1~ent, exclnding interest for the delayed period of

»A filing the appeal.

._ same, 75% with proportionate interest

orderc’d to be invested in FD. in any nationalized

” or scheduled Bank in the name of the claimant

‘for a period of 6 years, with a right to Withdraw interest

@,.

pefieciicaliy, and the remaining 25% with proportionate.–._

interest is ordered to be released in his favour.

No order as to costs. y ” :f_» ‘-

mgn*