High Court Karnataka High Court

Ranganaika vs K V Narayanasetty on 24 August, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Ranganaika vs K V Narayanasetty on 24 August, 2010
Author: B.Sreenivase Gowda
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

{DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF AUGUST, 20 :0
BEFORE " T

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.sREENIvAsE  4_

Miscellaneous First Appeal N0;”‘1>0215_’ ‘ E. z

Between

Ranganaika

S/0. Omkaranajka,

34 Years, V ; _
Permanent Resident” of T hc)_I1Vdav adi’~
Village and Post, Begur Hobli ‘
Gundlupet Taluky’ —

Present1y~’res§ding._atg .

DeVee1jamman_aha_1ii_Village V .
Kasaba_HiJb_.1i, » an ”

NanJsanagud’T;aluK’ t

. ..Appe1lant
(By Adv.)

‘ 1 V’ ” V_VNa1’ay9nasetty

S / ‘0 :Ver1Katasubbasetty
A V E39 Yeaf_s{Occ: Business
“”–R/zit’. No.207, Ambika Nilaya
T; B); Extension

as “Guvndlupet Town

VV ‘Haridas J Udapa

S / 0 Jayaram Udapa
No.16 Block, No.8, SBM Colony,
Srirampura II Stage

(&’

Mysore

3. The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.,
No.73, I Floor
Madhesh Complex
Nazarabad, Mysore
Rep by its branch Manager

(By Sri. R Jaiprakash, Adv. _ _ AA ,
Notice to R. 1 and R;2é}fB dispensed

.’I’his MFA filed U/s 17.3(j1v)_ of MV “Act, against the
judgement and award ‘dated 29′.-Q5..2008 passed in MVC
No.41/2006 on the file of. c:v:1jJudge”(sR.DN.) & JMFC,
Nanjangud, partly allowing’ fthre. “e1aiv;–‘n petition for
compensation aiid.__see}{ing’ ei1hanc_eIn’entV”for compensation.

This ‘~foi:9v_’Ag:’l.mission, this day. the
Court, delivered the fo1l.o’wi_ng’:'”

,’1’his appeaiis dbydztthe claimant for enhancement of

. Kconxlpensatiwyonfl awatded by the Tribunal.

it appeal is admitted and with the consent

2 _ of ie’a_rned’ Connsel appearing for the parties, it is taken up

t d H ‘T i’ 4.” ‘ -~ “or ‘final’ disposal.

.;.4..Res_pondents 7.

3. For the sake of convenience parties are referred to as
they are referred to in the claim petition before the

Tribunal.

4. Brief facts of the case are:

That on 7-11-05, when the ‘Wash:-aseiliri

tender coconut by the side _Bangalore 5 lrgad,

Chikkahundi gate, a registration
No.KA–O9–1\/{-4892 carnelllin. -negligent manner
and dashed agaiiiiéit ‘ the claimant fell
down and ” he filed a claim
petition “”” thetp Nanjangud, seeking
c0mpen’s_atibn V –. The Tribunal by

impugnedljudgmentAandiaward has awarded compensation

.._Qf ¥”v.rit.h’ interest at 6% p.a. Aggrieved by the

icvoinpensation awarded by the Tribunal the

clairriant in appeal seeking enhancement of

‘ »- 2, ‘ vcompensation.

HAAS there is no dispute regarding occurrence of

“accident, negligence and liability of the insurer of the

w.

offending vehicle, the only point that remains for my

consideration in the appeal is:

Whether the quantum of coInpensation_r._V
awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper. or
does it call for enhancement? ‘ –« –~–. ” ‘

6. After hearing the learned Counsel for~’the::lpa1etie.s

perusing the award of the Tribunal. ldéflfhltlle

the compensation awarded the Tribunal ‘d’ne.t.,

proper, it is on the lower side therefore deserved to

be enhanced.

left and fibula

2) ctu.re”ofh and left clavicle.

“VV’Inju-ries :_sAusrtained”‘by° him are evident from the wound

discharge card ~– EX.P.94, X–rays – Ex.

record — Ex.P.9’7 and supported by oral

ll””<.__levidenc.e.y__-of the claimant and doctor examined as P.Ws.1

…and–..'2…:respective1y. He was treated as inpatient for 57 days

d ' 2 R.Hospita1, Mysore.

632′-2′

P.W.2 «- doctor has stated, claimant has suffered disability

of 40% to whole body.

7. Considering the nature of injuries, and

fractures, Rs.35,000/- awarded the T

pain and suffering is on the lower side

sum of Rs.50,000/- is awarde.d*u;nder”this

8. As Rs.12,000/– Vawarded’hy{_t.h’e«.pTribunal towards
medical expenses is as ‘per wmedioal””‘=hillws_produced by the

claimant for the ‘just and proper and

therefore, it €cl.Voeshnot

9. Claimant’ as inpatient for 57 days in

K.R.I-Iospital;.,Mysore;’=,_Cohsidering the same, Rs.’/2700/~

the towards incidental expenses such

con*J_e’y*.anc4e,.s_nourishing food and attendant charges is

on ftliewlower and it is deserved to be enhanced and I

._award Rs.,i.75,OO0/~ under this head.

‘The Tribunal assessing his income at Rs.3,000/- per

and considering the period of treatment as four

months, has awarded Rs.12,000/- towards loss of income

%

1) Pain and suffering Rs. 50,000/–

2) Medical expenses Rs. 1 2 , 000/ —

3) Incidental expenses Rs. 15,000)’:

4) Towards loss of income
during laid up period Rs. 12.,_OQO–/R V

5] Towards loss of amenities Rs. f?£0,00Q/ .

6) Future loss of income Rs. 1;4_4,()jOw0″/– ‘ .,

7) Future medial expenses” p Rs.” “iO_;O00V/”:

15. Accordingly the appea1″”‘isV:..”alioyved and the
Judgment and award niodiiied to the
extent stated herein entitled for a
total ‘V;-of as against
Rs. 1,01,26O:./5 with interest at 6%
p.a. on of Rs. 1,61,740/– from

the date of._cR1a.irn the date of realisation.

,_1_6_ .1’§i’h;e.:I11surance–*Co. is directed to deposit the enhanced

‘c_otnp’ensation.,_an1ount with interest within two months

fronithe receipt of a copy of this judgment.

it of the enhanced compensation, Rs.1,25,000/–

…d.’with»piroportionate interest is ordered to be invested in FD.

the name of the ciaimant, in any nationalised or

scheduled Bank, for a period of 10 years with a right to
g/.

withdraw inierest periodically, and the remaining amount
with proportionate interest is ordered to be released’.-in his

favour.

No order as to costs.

mgn*     &