High Court Karnataka High Court

Shankrappa S/Odundappa Hadapad vs Laxman S/O Shankar Daddagol on 28 January, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Shankrappa S/Odundappa Hadapad vs Laxman S/O Shankar Daddagol on 28 January, 2010
Author: V.Jagannathan
MFA N0.22922 of 2009

IN THE HIGI-ECOURT OF KARNATAKA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT DI-IARWAD

DATED THIS THE 28'?" DAY OF JANUARY 2910
BEFORE T' 
THE HON'BLE MR.JUS'1'ICE v.JAGANI§AinA§i   
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST ApPEA.L»aNo..229_'2':i'['2"cba mm  u 
BETWEEN:   " 'L A  'V  H

Shankrappa, S/0 Dundappa._H~a_dapad.,_    
Age: 22 years, ~~  _  
Occ: Barbar 85 Agriculture,  -. 

Now NiI,R/o YadWac'1,--,_ j  

Tq: Gokak, Dist: Be1gaL'1Vr§1.'        . ...APPELLANT

(By Sri.   

1. LaXma'13,_, S   Daddagol,
Age: majcnf, Occ: Business,
R1] 0 Hunsya}--..PY, Tq: Gokak,

.  A "Di'st1:""Be1gaum. """ "

'  ~..  Manager,

 United--'V.'E,jndIia Insurance Co. Ltd.,
12/ by it'Vs}=the Divisional Manager,
Di'i[iSi.OI1al Office,
Theljnited India Insurance Co. Ltd.,

" ~  'T "Maruti Gani, Belgaum. ...RESPONDENTS

(By Sri. Ravindra.R.Mane, Advocate for R2)

MFA No.22922 of 2009

This miscellaneous first appeal is filed under
Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act again:2_t”‘»the
judgment and award dated 02.06.2008 passed–‘ii’lw__’MVC,
No.1l37/ 2006 on the file of the Principal C’iv’–i«l..[J.1idge~~.
(so) & Addl. MACT, Gokak, partly a;1,lowing’*-‘”the’s ‘ g
compensation and seeking enhar-w:.,.einVe11t . of
compensation. 7

This~ miscellaneous first coming

orders this day, the Court delivered the foll;.JWing_;_H i V
JUDGMENT’ ‘

Heard the learned :.fo”f-tl1.e’lparties finally in
respect of the” V__appé§1~. . claimant for
enhan.cemeI’1t”v-:)f if H

2’; Shri Hanrnant.R.Latur,

submits the -Moto1’…l5&ccident Claims Tribunal erred

the income. of the appellant at Rs.80/ — per day

being engaged in barber profession,

iii/’as more than Rs.l0,000/~> per month.

i’v..,Secon”cl:l}}1~, the loss of future earning capacity percentage

is also on the lower side and further enhancement

sought under the heads ‘medical expenses,

2?

MFA NCL22922 of 2009

attendance charges’ ‘loss of amenities of life’,-and

no amount is given towards marriage prospects. T

3. On the other hand, submission ‘v
RaVindra.R.Mane, learned 3
respondent–insurance com}_5any,
Accident Claims adequate
compensation; that th_g._}§’erc’ent::agé”QflAd’isabi1ity taken by
the Tribunal isltself that the
income given an upper

revision,

4.l”In the above submissions, I am of

the View that.._:ltheT’ iricolrne could have been taken at

pier daglzwlas the appellant was engaged in

andlhdisability at 15% having regard to

the ‘lim1:}_v’dis:al§i1ity which is put at 45%. Consequently,

lundper the head ‘loss of future earning capacity’, the

Jactuall amount to which the appellant will be entitled to

-is7:Rs.1,16,640/– as against Rs.51,840/- given by the

iv

9

MFA No.22922 of 2009

Tribunal and the difference under this head will be
Rs.6-4,800/–. Towards ‘loss of amenities of life’, a
sum of Rs.I0,000/- is awarded and towaiids ”
expenses, diet, attendance Ch:-c11’g€–s¢ at
together, Rs.5,000/– more is
marriage prospects’, a suni V
Thus, the compensation&getAs”eriliatiE;e.d Rs.8é,800/-.
The said amount will annurn.

Award §j»5″=r;ii)dif’i.edg allowing the

appeal
saf-

Iudge

Kms*