MFA.No. 3395. 2003
.. 1 ..
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THENEAY or? GCFOBER, 2003
PRESENT
THE HoN*ELE MR.JUS'I'ICE K.L.MANJU;§5fifHE.f"Ej'--.E:..
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTIC.E"B.V.Ni§éA§§fET§fiNA;,f,
M.E.A.N0.33é§:={2é§_03' 1 A
BETWEEE: jj %' 1% A'
SHOVEL clvwi '
AGED 10, s/o;$v1,vEs*rE;e-E REG5
RERBY ms NEXT 1:21-EN;3:,AN--:: NATURAL
..A..GE[5..[ o,.s*zLvEs?rEE AJITH REGO
R/AT"KADIKA}J!BL¢A HOUSE, SHIRVA POST
2._UEU:9.I 5"§'%3.,_1'1{5 .. '
V % 4% ...A,P.PELLAN'I'
Sm K GiR!1f)}§£AR:, ADV.)
AB-EUL RAZAK
.. AGED 21, S/QSABAN SAHEB
'=R/ AT SORKALA HOUSE, SHIRVA VILLAGE
UDUPI
2 IRENE VICTORIA CABRAL
AGED 35, W/OJERALD PETER
CABRAL, Fa'/AT DOOR NC). 15-16(1)
MARKET ROAD, SHIRVA, MANCHAKAL
U01}?!
3 NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD
BRANCH OFFICE, MODERN BUILDING
MFA.No.3395.2003
unconscious and was aackmitted in intensive care unit of KMC
Hospital Manipal and was discharged on 28.1.200(,'i.:.._ 'As a
msult of the head injuries and other injuries,__
had to discontinue his studies. conmadsngj ':V*.:1i:§{::h.e
aufiéred permanent disabiiity, he ifirge '12
seeking compensation on vazrious heasién
3. On receipt of nofice theV.'i'3:ib"tr.n;é_LR}§ee;jéi1denfV
Nos 1 and 2 did not vappear_axid.. while
Respondent No.3 insane 3 its writtensiatemeiit in the clam1′ petition
and oéntéxjdmg had occurred on account of
the on the part of the claimant and
souéhtefogjdismissal of the petition.
.’ the above pleadings, the Txibunai foamed the
.~ ~ ‘f..–“”I. Whether the petitioner proves that he
17961 Vwiih an accident on 23.12.1999 at about
” 9.00am at Kadikambla of Shinra vilfczge while he
* was walking on the side of the road qfler
crossing the said road?
2. Whether the petitioner proves that the
said accident was occurred safely due to the rash
and negligence on the part of the driver of the
Marathi Omm’ bearing registration No.KA«-
/£95,.
MFA.No. 3395.2003
__5..
6. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant
and learned Counsel for Respondent No.3. J
7. It is submitted on behalf of the appeI.Esa::;t.’jt3i’ef;VV”-12;:
‘i’ribunal fafled to appreciate the evideneefofo 1″
Satyanarayana Shenoy with the Vi1:ijuL’1V’iesbT AV
caused to the brain which is wnehessééd by I-‘.. ‘bein.g
the disability certificate afidvfiiexefoié tt;e–f:§;¥;bii;fié1″oijght iio
have awarded eompensation” the ’10$S’.r’ 0f memory
power, as Well as Iossof éxylenifies; Further the amount
awanied expenses and incidental charges is
also he requests the Court to 11:-
assess the compenséfion. »
V T. while supporting the judgment and award
.’ ‘o:f’Vt11ev_’I” ;1*1¥hv_::i13n:: al, counsel for the Respondent No. 3 Insurance
had contended that the Tribunal has considered
” evidence of Doctor as Well as the documentary evidence
and has awantim a just compensation which does not call for
‘ any interference in this appeal. Taking note of the rival
contentions, the only point that arises of our consideration is
to whether the appellant is entitled to additionai
compensation. ‘
MFA.No.3395.2GO3
… 3 …
income has been computed. We propose to It:-asaess the
compensation as follows:
Injury, pain and sufiisriazg Rs. 75,(}(}»{)}*
Medical expenses and incidental charges Rs. ‘Q .
Future medicalexpcnses Loss of amenities Loss offI1ture income 'Rs, Total Rs.
The said compenaation _at 6′ ‘AA:V p.a. from
me date of petition ‘ ‘>~7IQv’;’t of the said
compensau::»:§A’s;'”a£R$;-._4,éG-,9e9}- $113.11 be deposited in
any appellant attains the age of
majotity ‘shall be entitled to withdraw
_ penmijiéaz inte:é$a §:;;; tfic said deposit. The balance deposit
to the appcfiant.
._ allowed inpartin the above terms.
Sd/-
Judge
Sd/-K
Judge