High Court Karnataka High Court

Shri Ramaling Gurushidda … vs Dondubai on 20 August, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Shri Ramaling Gurushidda … vs Dondubai on 20 August, 2010
Author: A.S.Bopanna
INTHHBHHHICOURTCHPKARNATAKA

CHRCUYFBENCHIUNDHARWAD

DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY 05* AUGUST, 2_c;1'0«'   ;_. A' 

BEFORE

THE Hoxsmsm MR. JUsT1cE:A.s,_AABQPANi~;A..: "   'V T T

M.F.A. No.207o5,i.2010fMQ

BEUNEEN:

SI-IRE RAMALING GURU'SHID£_)_A3~.SATAI€AIK._
AGE 43 YEARS, ocC:DR1vE,f:q.'_ f  
R/O ULLAGAD_D'I._KHAN"APUR;,  1  »
TAL: HUKKER1,";),A1sT;BELGVA;U:v1 A "  .. 

".APPELLANT

(By Sri. /S311"':"'VLiAyKfi?i§1§k1A_i§~  H0:§A*1"f1)

AND

.1-

.!\-J

 ':'_4(§-Y

sM§If'D0NDUBAi "
W,/O N.I;~4 GAPPA KHADE

 ,A 'AGE 4'8"1'EAA--RS, OCC:HOUSE31-IOLD WORK
 _ =R_/'OT. KA_§\rAG.ALA, TAL: HUKKERI
" ._DI_$T:'BE«;,,QA.§5M

N A--'1'EO__NA~1AINSURANCE COMPANY LTD
RAM.DE;_v GALLI, BELGAUM

 .. By ITS-'DIVESIONAL MANAGER

u.RESPONDENT$)

ISRLM. Y. KATAGI, ADV. FOR R–2)

#4

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF M.\/. ACT, AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 30–O9-2009 PASSED IN
MVC NO2269/2002 ON THE FILE OF THE FAST TRACK
COURT AND MEMBER, MACT, HUKKERI, PARTLY ALLOWING
THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND

ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION, AND ETC. I t- _ V ”

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSIQN”THIS’~

THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING’: j

.IUDGM’I3N’I’

The claimant in MVC. No.’i2é’e.9/02″‘is__ b~e.fuor-‘e this’ Court * E’

seeking enhancement of the compe-ns.at_io’n,A Thie-Tribunal has
awarded totai cornpensatioriof it _

2. Heard iearned foir the parties and

perused the a’ppeaII ‘

3. _ Tfaet that~–vthe–“cIaimant has suffered injuries in

tilt? which I’o’ceu«r’red on 29.4.2002 is not in dispute.

The:niatVur’e_TofV'”theainjuries suffered by the claimant is also

estabiished ‘bI3ITi’j_tI–I€ wound certificate which was marked as

Exhibit’ I The said document would indicate that the

cliairnaiite had suffered fracture of frontai bone, fracture of skuli

of temporal bone on left. The nature of the

,,a.

treatment secured by the claimant is estabiished by producing

medical records and the doctor was examined as PW.3. ‘The

doctor has stated the disabiiity at 20%. The Tribunal”-.ljia.s

reckoned the same as ‘f’% to the whole

appropriate.

4. With respect to the incomekof

absence of documentary evidence.V::t’1*:e Tri’b11__na1_V_hvasl”:.reCko’ned
the same at Rs.100/– per day.VAv——lifiLv–_the instant case, the
avocation of the claimant as much as,
he was working asa ,drive’r}’ conservative
estimate a taken and the
monthly income/–. On that basis, if the

amount toward_sioss”of 4l1″utL1re.»i.earning is taken it would be in a

___Sum Q£l:”‘uRSk41,58’G%V;:-V The Tribunal infact has awarded

.of~-..Rs.37,800/– both under the head of future

loss._due and also due to loss of amenities.

However, tlaie said amount is considered only as future loss and

,.,fl.,uif_ilEl16V–._SaTf16s is deducted the claimant would be entitled to

4’_’pa’1:~,fic~.:~iz5£ Rs.3,780/. In that View the claimant is also entitled

ditto-»vanother sum of Rs.15,000/– towards loss of amenities. In

{Pi} ‘\
: lé?X::’L@’\*wM>e~ xvyhrvgn

4
addition, the amount awarded towards pain and suffering is on

the lower side and as such, a sum of Rs.l0,000/- is awarded.

For the laid up period, no amount is awarded. Hence a _.sutni..’of.

Rs.l0,000/~ is awarded under the said head. To .

the shortfall, if there is any, in respect of other heaidsfia ,si’1m’*of i

Rs.5000/– is awarded.

5. Hence, the claimant is__V:e~ntitled’-
compensation of I?is.43,780;_/_– at.ithe:V._saA1jrie rate
and the manner as awarded*–zi.byAti–a_p.e The enhanced
amount with interest Vshalil-“be. Insurance

Company within 4al;per;§iod_ of i’si:<t:.weel<s:jfro1ri'the date of receipt

of a copyiaof ,thisi"order.ldeposit, the same shall be

disbursed to the4clairnar1t"..:i . "

terms iof”‘L~he”above, the appeal stands disposed
of; or”der’–as” costs.

sag:

reeds