High Court Karnataka High Court

S Mahesha vs Sri Raghunath on 21 September, 2010

Karnataka High Court
S Mahesha vs Sri Raghunath on 21 September, 2010
Author: B.Sreenivase Gowda
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATE!) THIS THE 21ST DAY 0:» SEPTEMBER, 2.910
BEFORE " 'T

THE I-ION'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.SREENIV1_§E5ViI*'."  

Miscellaneous First Appeal No: 8.01 1:" K V'

BETWEEN

S Mahesha,

S / O M Surendra Rao

Aged about 29 Years  A *  ' 
R/at. No.138, Sharadha Ni1ay.j_a,v "  '  
Gollahalli Village, Anjanapura';     9
Bangalore » 530 062,."   '

' Appellant
(By   go 4: ii
1 . Ste"  "   4' V.
. * S/O. Vgrasarnurthy

.   aboAu*;.  Years
P~a"rtfie1f, Srinivas Transport

A" A  A._tV'No«._6'4a4, 80 Feet Road

  Gifr1'f1agarv~'II Stage
 Bangalore -- 560027.

 2. ' fhe Divisional Manager,

'I"h.e Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.,

AA  Division Office,

 At D. 0. VI, No.232/19
Pavithra South Avenue,
9"' Main Road, SK' Block,
Jayanagar,



Bangalore - 560 O1 1.
 Respondents

(By Sri. K. Suresh, Adv. for R2.

R1 – Served)

This MFA is filed U / S 1′?3[li) of MV .. Ci
judgment and award dated: 6f.’3.’2008′..passed._ in’~§Vl\/’=»’_3

No. 2743/2007 on the file of’».._the”X}VIl§ Ad’dl§”VJndge,

Court of Small Causes, Member;E\/iact~-4,i’Vl§Zletropo.litan;_
Bangalore, [SCCH.No.4},’ partly “~allo.win_g (‘them elaimj

petition for compensation ar:..d”*seeking_ enhancement of
compensation.

This appeal ConiirighonVpifor’aAdn’iission, this day,
the Court, delivered the’_folioinrjpng;’~.,v 1 ._

This claimant for enhancement of

Cornpen–s’ation”avb”a1 the Tribunal.

A i,.A’-Heard. x’The”appeal is admitted and with the

ofrv1:e’arned Counsel appearing for the parties, it

for final disposal.

~ it For the sake of convenience parties are referred to

as they are referred to in the clairn petition before the

Tribunal.

4. Brief facts of the case are:

That on 16/17-SW07 midnight, when the

was riding a motor cycle bearing registrationji\i’o;if’:Z§–V5§il-~.

K8522 on Bangalore–1\/iangalore -.

Adichunch anagiri Hospital, Bel.1_vur,’- .. the 4 l ‘of,

bearing registration No.~’ivi{_Aw16’4?5E~8 _i”ron1_:”e.

opposite direction in a rash__an.d negligent manner and

dashed against his””niotor ;c;;¢1ep;;i a result, the

claimant filed a claim
petition it Eangaiore, seeking
compensation The Tribunal by
impuigned: award has awarded

compensation /– with interest at 6% p.a.

by the..Hq1i1.antum of compensation awarded by

_ the claimant is in appeal seeking

lenlhancerrierit of compensation.

at As there is no dispute regarding occurrence of

flaccident, negligence and liability of the insurer of the

“ioffending vehicle, the only point that remains for my

consideration in the appeal is:

Whether the quantum of
compensation awarded by the Tribunal is.
just and proper or does it cail fo1”,_
enhancement? ‘

6. After hearing the learned Counseiu

and perusing the award of theii

View that the Compensation awardedby

not just and proper, it is on’t1::e1owerVs’id’eanddtherefore
it is deserved to be H V

7. The ciajihant it t the following
injuries: V W t I
1}
A
‘3) Iiiracturey end of right radius

” 4534s}_:FractuAre’ of-metacarpal or right hand.

“7′.__y.Inju_ri€s.t..;”sustained by him are evident from the

woundv–._’:¢er’tificate — Ex.P.7, discharge summary -~

.c,’V:£e3;;.;P_.8,Vv”‘Case sheet ~ Ex.P.10, admission record ~~«–

.’ and supported by oral evidence of the claimant

“and doctor examined as P.Ws.1 and 2 respectiveiy.

fir

Claimant was treated as inpatient for 15 days at Sanjay

Gandhi Hospital, Bangalore.

P.W.2 ~«~ an Orthopaedic Surgeon

Gandhi Hospital, Bangalore, has stated _

that, he examined the c1aiii_1ant.4,AAfon–,,g

assessment of disability and-.__found.riiovements of lifightl’,

knee is restricted by 40 degree has
difficulty in sitting, powerldoixthe right
codricepts muscles in lifting
heavy of 37% to

right limb and 28% to
the wholeglboduynf -~ it h

8. =£_onsid~eriiig thevnature of injuries, Rs.30,000/–

by__the ribunal towards pain and suffering is

, and it is deserved to be enhanced by

another -R5’s,15,000/– and I award Rs.45,000/– under

iithis head.

Claimant has produced medical bills for

Rs. 17,542/» and the Tribunal has awarded Rs.20,000/w

£52:

towards medical and incidental expenses. Thereby, it
has awarded Rs.2,458/– towards incidental expenses.

Claimant was treated as inpatient for

Considering the same, it is on the §lov:Ie1f”-side’.

Therefore, a sum of Rs.25,0QU’/”–“i«s

medical and incidental expenses.’.__

10. Claimant claims to ” per
month, by Working’aalilla.irlead:VC’hC’ooit{‘ -But the same is
not establishedby In the
absence assessing his
and considering the
period ‘of “three months, has awarded
Rs.9,O0Vt);!..-gt of income during laid up

The san:1_e..is just and proper and there is no

‘ sscope-for;enhancement under this head.

ll. Coiisidering the disability stated by the doctor

‘A and amount of discomfort and unhappiness which

flthe: claimant has to undergo for the rest of his life,

“lRs.15,000/~awarded by the Tribunal. towards loss of

amenities is just and proper and there is r1o’scope for

enhancement under this head.

12. Claimant aged about 28 years. Multiplier

applicable to his age group is ’17’.

assessed at Rs.3,000/– per month. Consiideringidddthe

disability stated by the dootorsitod the_ i«irn.bsd,:_”disahilityr

caused to the whole body v4C.o’rn._es errfflurld it

Therefore, future loss of”-Iineome’ out to

Rs.1,53,000/– {Rs.3:,0.0Qi.:’;25]..1.00 “12 X17].
Considering that the the Tribunal

at Rs.l,61.280}{.s’pis is worked out

here, it does notVj’req»uire__ enhancement.

13. awarded Rs.5,000/~ towards

fuo_t’1§u*e__r11eVdicai”‘cxp_er1ses. The same is just and proper

‘ send. rrot’require enhancement.

iii:

14. Thus the claimant is entitled for the following

compensation:

1) Pain and suffering Rs. 1′

2) Medical and incidental ” L” T’ V

Expenses 1 A V’

3) Towards loss of income

during laid up perioidi” A

4) Towards loss of a1ne=nitie=sg..iv Rs.” 1’5′,OVG–0/’=73, f

5} Future loss of income.__ Rs;..1,’61i2’8_U~/}”~._
6} Future medicafiiexpensesi v.5_V,0Q0/4

‘1?isi2,6(9.28G/-

Accordingly part and the
Judgment modified to the
extent Ciaimant is entitled for
a i’..iV{Vs’.Vfi,6O,28O/- as against
the Tribunai with interest at

6%’ pa. enhanced compensation of Rs.20,000/–

claim petition till the date of

._ res1isati.on{:’V

* !’i:7he Insurance Co. is directed to deposit the

it uenhanced compensation amount with interest within

two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this

%

judgment and the same is ordered to be released in

favour of the claimant.

No order as to costs. . ,

mgn*