I REA 1033552096
iN THE P{iGH COURT OF' KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BE._l'§CH
AT GULBARGA 1
DATED THIS THE gm mi? OF APRIL, "
PRESENT % "
Tm: I~iON'BLE MR.JUS'FiCE:;'£3§Al§f§ N'{)v
AND _ . _
THE HONTSLE MR.JUST£QE--:§IN.V§i\IU(}O}5}¥;LA1,§C§V§}DA 1'
BETWEEN:
Siddaxxlfiouda _ V
Maflangouda patfi . ' ._
Age 48 Years, ' '
Occupation " '
R/0 Kax:u11rr,-----. __ "i::;,
Taluka and Disti'*iCjt.. &
Bijapur. " V. 4' ..APPELLAN'¥'
(By Sri Bapugétazfiiav SVi'd-ziapfya
Sri Umegsh V.Mamdg1p1ir, Adv.)
1.)' ~.Ma_:iemab3, " T~ . V V
W/' :,xAbcit;J"_'Ra2;a}c Jahagirdar,
Agc.__ma3Qr, ciqcupatton
Gwzier of Jeep, taiuka Ga
-- ' ._Distri<:*:VvBii.;'ap11r.
'V " 2') :1' "£'h{V:% 'Branch Manager,
_ Qfiexxfai Insurance Co.Ltd.
" Bijapur-'S85 101. ...RESPONDEN'i'S
' _ u{B);'Smt. Sumithra H. Adv. for R-2)
6
2 MFA 1038552006
This MFA is filed under Section 173(1) of M.V the
Judmeut and award dated 31/03; 2006 pas_5ée_}md ' Q No.
601/2084 on the file of the lI.Acid1.Distriet
Iii, Bijapur, partly allowing the claimfjiitititiogclilfogj.eeiézlpenaatlen
seeking enhancement of coaapensafioia, T A '
This Appeal coming on fotihvédjifll g l6d.ay; 'B'Y'lj?ARElDDY,
J delivexed the following. nl 7
[2a?i?f§'l AA
. ;,
...._...'- ..__._... v_...._.......
This is an appeal enhancement of
compensation.' 'V I l 1 l V V
2. The' ufheappefiant was a pillion rider of
the Motor with an accident resulting in injury
to the appellalézlthll was admiited in hospital and even
~af_te:r hfeatn3_ent,,_ waa"fo1::2.d' to have suflered permanent disability. in
-he had appmached Meter Accidents Claims
V ~:el.aimed for compensation. The Tribunal on
consiiefafida the petition and on contest by the insurer, has
total sum of Rs.1,8{},(){)O/ ~. The appellant being
I» dissa-tiafieci with the amount: of compensation, is before the Court
f V _ J eliaiienging the awani.
3 IVWA 1038552066
3. It is contended that the appellant has been just
amount of cmnpensation, having regard to the 'sf
permanent disabiiity, which has been»..»ig13Q;e+-éidd
proceeding is make an assessment 5
income attributed to compute tl1¢:':_ss1;.1e. is
medical certificate with Iegaxd suflereci
from a disability of 60% limbs resulting in a
large disability to the_whmpe;nsaflon under the several heads.
V The comes} for the respondent on the other hand would point
out that the primary contention of the sppefiant as regards disability,
6
4 NWA 1938552006
is not supported by evidence. In this regard the counsel points out
that the medical practitioner has merely stated that the in
relation to the lower limbs was 60 to 65%. in :Ӵ,_l16
Tribunal llas, therefore, questioned the xxaeziical
to ascertain as to the percentage of
limbs and lower limbs separately. ,e”i’c_. whiclllthe
has zeplied that the disability to the tc:§1(l’l°/o and the
remaining percentage of ~- to the lower
limbs. If this is taken m;g%~l~.%:he Tribunal having
adopted a percentage’ 011 a speculative basis
and -dfliflsafiility is to a larger extent,
which has ntlfibeen cannot be accepted. Further,
it is conjtendedlll’ having awatdecl even sum of
C-apnot” befiistified and in this View of the matter, the
net »iiie;eit:..e0nsicieratien and be dismissed.
circumstances and going by the nebuleus
-. j;-medical evid.ei’1ce in support of the contention that there is a larger
_e”f”A_’permane:1t disability, cannot be accepted. There is no
. made out for enhancement of compensation on the fcxuting
there is permanent dieability resulting in loss of income and
eaming capacity. The award of Re.1,8{},0O(}/~ adequately
8
5 MFA 10385/2606
Cempensatcs the appellant ft): the nattim of in3’uries:~ ‘ has
suficmei. There is case made: (mt for enhancemjrfiat.’ ‘A
stands dismissed.
-TUDGE
SN