IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALOE§E'»
DATED THIS THE 5TH my OF' JANUARY, 28-O«9; ._'__: L'
PRESENT
THE I~:N'BLE MR. JUSTICE Kf.%sR1_$3EDr1a§e%RIAQ% ; 7
AND .
THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE sA?fAniARAY;ANA
M.F'.A. N391/A2904,
1_3£~;s2_/3003 A_I~g:.:> }363_;?2_()_§£3
M-A»
BETWEEN 4'
1
$M'Ii_ARi5NE)_H'ATI mo
%."m3§:D 35 YEARS MMMM W -
" . _ "W; C} f:A*'1'~1=;._ SHANKAR NAG
- K51' A ~
'ff!/O LHFEATSHANKAR NAG
"-MIN_0i?,V REP BY HER MOTHER AND
NATURAL GUARDIAN
x J SMT, ARUNDAT: NAG
H = ._ém'H ARE R/A'? NCL6, SINGASANDRA
BANGALORE
APPELLENTS
(BY SR1 V RAMESH BAB§} AN D C K RAGHAVENDRA
SR1 8.8. RAGHUPRASAD, AQVCICATES)
E
AND
SAHIB AHMED
RAJA SAB SFEKDAR
AZAMNAGAR, 47"' MAIN ROAD
MARKET ROAD, BELGAUM
SR: MOHAMMED RAFIA
3/0 ABDUL RAJAK
3645, KHANJAR GALLI
BELGAUM V
M] s. THE ORIENTAL INSURAN-€:.5i3m.,:
2391-92, SIDDANNA CHAMBERS A =
KADA BAZAR, BELGAU;M BR':3;NQH _j-_ V' '
BYITS BRANC__i}if§L¢\DI14§C}EI%3;_' 4_
Sm. ARuN'z)HAf1";~1: Rack ', "
w/ 0 LATE. SHANI€A_R. NAG. '
AGED36 YEARS H % _--
N0.65,<s1I€GsAND'RA '-
BANGALORE ' ' 'V
M1ssVx:AvY§S" V .
13/ Q._iLA1"i$ SHANKAR NA
" .AG«"r3If5' ITEYEARS, MINOR,
,RE.PRE'»SEI¥T_ED. BY HER MOTHER
1Arcp"rm'mRA'L-T_ CKJARDIAN
SMT,_%ARUz9:_;.)H~5'i'I NAG
M] S: U:+;<:'1*3s.r.é' INDIA INSURANCE (:0. £119.,
7. £0.22-1, MISSION ROAD
I:1ANGAL'ORE,
% ~ .T}YI'1'S BRANCH MANAGER
... RESFONDENTS
'§BY- SR1 M SGWRI RAJU, ADVGCATE FOR R2 65 R3,
SR! 0 MAHESH, ADVOCATE FOR R6)
5%
" 9:
'I'HiS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT§V_A(}A{;'£._S_'i'f-'._.\ .
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DA'l'ED:30.i{).(}2 'P_ASSE£) IN»
MVC No.89?/00 ONATHE FILE OF THE v1~'AD:31.."'~<:I'vIL
JUDGE 85 MACLII, METRoPoLI'rAN""AREA;_' EANGALORE
(SCCH No.2), PARTLY ALLOWING !f1'HE:..TciLA3M...?ET'i*1':AQN.,.
FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING E-NHANCENi~E3\ET"
CGMPENSATIQN.
3I.F.A. No. 166312093:
BETWEEN
SMTARUNDHATHIRAQ '
w/0 LATE s1--:ANK.AR. NAG
AGED 36 YEARS
R/A No.65, SiN('3AS;fi-N--Dfx'A--..__ '
BANGALORE' _ :j__'_ » _ «_
.... _ ...AP¥'ELLANT
(BY SR1v'R;A1s);54;a~fi3AE§U"---.A'ND c K RAGHAVENDRA
- 3:3. RAGIr{1"UP?_A'SAi), ADVOCATES)
AND
V-':$';A}:iI§3 AHMEi}"' AAAAA
, ~ . 3 1T<AJ1£SA_B' STEKDAR,
_AZA?{I&NA(}AR..
._ .{I(f3i"is1AEN ROAD, MARKET ROAD
A VBELGAUTMV
SR}. MOHAMMEE) RAFIA
' .. _S/O'-ABDUL RAJAK
V 3545, KHANJAR GALLI
"--?.ELGAUM
M/S. THE {)R§EN'I'AL ENSURANCE CG. L'{'D.,
289}.-92, SIDDANNA CHAMBERS
KA§A BAZAR, BELGAUM BRANCH
BY ITS ERANCH MANAGER
Ci?
4 SMT. ARUNDHATHI RAG
W]O LATE SHANKAR NAGA
240.65, SINGASANDRA,
BANGALORE
5 MISS KAVYA
D/O LATE SHANKAR NAG'
MiNOR', REP BY HER MO'¥'HER
AND NATURAL GUARDIAN V'
SMT'. ARUNDATHI NAG
6 M/S. UNITED 1ND1A"1NsuI3ANCE",L";*D
N().22--1M¥SSION ROAD,' 5 i
BANGALORE' 1..
BY ITS BRANQH MANAGER A
'2 ' , RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.TM”‘S(3’«$?1R1VRAJU:;”ADxé§}§:ATE FOR R2 av. R3,
SR1 L s:2:.:gKA:;Ni;*_A’;:Ao, ADVOCATE FOR R6)
‘I’H§S. MFA iS F’«ILE{)«..U*,’..S V.-173(1) 0? MV ACT AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT Ar~:D’A wAR1:> DA’¥’ED:3G. 10.02 PASSED IN
MVC No.396j.:>o” .03»: ‘1~’=,1_-«::’e:~~”’12’11,€ OF’ THE Vi ABEL. CIVIL
JUDGE} ‘&.MAC’I*».I_I,’ METROPOLITAN AREA, BANGALORE
5″‘~;.s3cc;9§’~:~N{;}{2)g PARTL’I–~ALLOWII’€{} THE CLAIM PETITION
FC3i’%’_.CO1\/iléfi-NSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF’
s-;:_o.MyEN::3A’rIm;;
g 2003:
‘
. YELLAVVA
W/0 LATE NINGAPPA
AGED 34 YEARS
V V _ ” SR1 PAKEERESHA
S] O LATE NINGAPPA
AGED 18 YEARS
4/
AND
GEETHA
D/{L} LATE NINGAPPA
AGED 16 YEARS, MINOR
RAVI
S/O LATE NINGAPPA
AGED 14 YEARS, MINOR
APPELLANTS 3 AND 4 ARE MINORS
REP. BY MOTHER AND
GUARDIAN YELLAVVA 1
ALL ARE R/AT No.55, _ _
SENGASANDRA, BANGALORE, V ._
” RPPELLANTS
(BY SR1 V .Iée,ME$H”‘BA}3L:”‘A;qD
SR1 8.8. RAGHUP1eAsAI1g,Armagzzvzras)
sAr§fiB’AH’M–§«::D ”
R2§a§A SAB S’rEKDA2,”‘2;ZAMNAGAR,
4TH MAIN ROA[}., MARKET’ ROAD,
“§§E1VLGAUM.”‘ A. V
‘ ~ V.1.V%SR1:”‘f§21{;{H’AMMEa RAFIA
S50-vABDi.5L’RAJAK
_ *-T’1364:3,”-:§H;{;¢JAR GALLI,
» ‘BELceAU’:M;’
.93′
ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. §.fI’D.,
.A _289′}—-.92, SIDDANNA CHAMBERS,
V KADA BAZAR, BELGAUM BRANCH,
‘ ‘-BY ETS BRANCH MANAGER.
SMT. ARUNDHATHI RAG
W/O LATE SHANKAR NAG
AGED 36 YEARS, _
R/AT N065, SINGSABEDRA,
BANGALORE.
S] . §.¢1€§é3€’ HLWTYA
” ‘M/S; UNITED INEIA INSURANCE co. L’I’D.,
(BY SR1 V RAMESH BABU, SR; 13.3. RAGHuPRAS.;é;”9i;é,’1~::5_”1’ .
SR1 C K RAGHAVENDRA, Ai)VOCATESj,_ ‘ – ‘
AND
1 SAHIB AHMED
RAJA SAB STEKDAR _
AZAMNAGAR, 4TH MAIN ROAD
MARKET ROAD, BELGAUM “
2 SR: MOHAMMED {<_A'i'i:A
S/OABDUL RAJAK .
3645, KHANJAR (E’rALLI” _ ‘
BELGAUM
3 M/S. Ti~i.§:–.0R:E_N1’AL _IN~$Ul?§i*JSfC3E5 Co. LTD.,
2891–9i2, s1’DQ”‘A’re.NA’-C;i~+iAm3ERs—
KAQA” BAZ.AR’,«:.; BEL-GE-XU?A” BRANSH
BY “I’I’S BRANCH “MA’r3A-GER_ ‘
4 ARUNDPi’A’i’H’Iv«R}3.0
w/0 LATE SHAIKEKARNAG
No.65, SENGSANDRA’ ”
I}AI%EC;ALOR’E_ ‘
” D] G.’ LATFESHAN KAR NAG
1- =.’,’&Gz’iI}-«._1?fi’E:ARS, MINOR
‘i1*EP.BYLi}IER MOTHER AND
“-1’$¥A’ifUF?A.L GUAREIAN
SM’I’;.,ARUNDHATI NAG
” NQ.22«~1, MISSION ROAD
BANGALORE
BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER
RESPONDENTS
(BY SR1 M SOWRI RAJU, ADVOCATE FOR R2,
SR1 P B RAJU, AEVQCATE FOR R3,
AND: , ”
SR1 S. SUNIL, ADVOCATE FOR R4,
SR] 0 MAHESH, ADVOCATE FOR R6)_. “—- 4 °” ‘
‘I’HiS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1)..QF4MV”AC3″‘:§XG}iIN’SfI’ u
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARE DA’§’E{):30. £0.02 -imssxsx) §N 7 «
MVC 190.895/90 ON THE FILE €I)l3’w.TI1£’_I1;A~’VITTA.I)”DL. &cI’X-:1. ij
JUDGE 35 MAC?-II, “ME”{‘R(}PG,L§TAN7..AREA, BA.NGALm.=zI.é-
(scan No.2), PARTLY ALLom*I_ma Tfi}:3- CLAIM P.EfF§TI€3N
FOR COlVIi3ENSATION ANB saaxgxm ENi£ANC£%’.M¥;}NT op
COMPENSATION.
.§.Is’.$ No. 13 10/3003} [ _
BETWEEN ‘
No.22-1, M1ssI<;N.R'G;A{) V.
BANGALORE » " " «-
BY ITS N£.¥\NA§:;E::%__, .77.
UNITED 1N;31A.’I;$;st;}é;,N.riE V’
… APPELLANT
{BY SR§ 0″MAH.ESH ‘é:..’y*E:f}:1.NA 0 MAHESH, ADVOCATES}
V” LA ‘ V. . f:’:P»dfi’.vA.YALE;AMMA @ YELLAVVA
A ” V _W/ O..Ni»NG_AFfPA FAKIRAPPA JADAR
* .1§§A;3′<31§.___ –
V V’ _2 ‘YALLAwwA
WfO”}NINGAPPA FAKIRAPPA JADAR
.. , LHMAJOR
“–Ffi.KIRES§~{A
S] C} N INGAPPA F’AK}§APPA JADAR
MINOR
‘A ” ~ 74 GEETHA
D] G BHNGAPPA FAIGRAPPA JADAR
MINOR
. ’13_AN{}A.Le”RE
SR] 83. GURUPRASAE), ABVOCATE FOR R16, R8 &. R9)
5 RAVI
s/0 NINGAPPA FAKIRAPPA JADAR
MINOR
RESPONDENTS 3 TO 5 ARE Mi_NORS is ‘ ‘
REP BY THEIR MOTHER AND ._ ” -, A.
NATURAL GUARDIAN 2ND.A’REsP0;~:_DENT
ALL ARE R/0 BANRAPURA””{R¢3n
TALUK SHIGGON, p.HARw,A§m1s1t._
6 MOHAMMED RAFEA” ~ ‘-
S/O ABDUL RAZAK MAJOR . ..
No.36-45, E{H’A.NJAI%__G2%LLI
BEL(34AU,M–. ~ ~
7 QRiENTAL ‘in-:~:i%?.;L:R;I:.’:s1′<:,$7£::Ci .::1§£'[)}
N{);':289ir9i:2, sI';Ig)'DA'R.NA. CHAMBERS
KHXADE .8AZ;=§?.,_V 'BEL!3AU_hi .
3 SMT. ARUANDHA'FI'RAO._ '
W10 LATE $:':HA,'.SEKAR'N'AG
WAIDR ' . '
Q :s:9.63'," S§,MGASANDRA
9-.. .;-MI3S"KAVYA–»"
E»/”0 LA?’-EA’SHANKAR NAG
-MIN{)R,_ RER.BY HER MOTHER
NA.fmRAL GUARMAN
3% RESPONDENT, ARUNDHATI RAG
” ‘ARR/0 0340.63, SXNGASANDRA
– .,B£&NGALOE’E
” RESPGNDENTS
‘ (BY SR! M SOWRI RAJU, ADVOCATE FOR R6 32; R7,
4/
10
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) 01:’ MV ACT AGAi.3_§sT
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARE DA’I’ED:3G.1(}.02 PAssE;*m.;Q’VV.’
MVC.NO.894/GO ON THE FILE OF THE 6TH A13;f)’L.« ..g::yi~L..V
wncag, MAC’I’–2, BANGALORE, PARTLY ALLO-WING_V’FHE. ‘
CLAIM PETITION FDR COMPENSATION.
M.I”.A. 169.301/2004: %
BETWEEN
SR1 MOHAMED RAFIQ
S]OABDUL RAZACK,
MSSLIM, MALE, Asuzzi’, .. _ _ A
R/O NO3645, KANJHAR GALLI,’a_ 1
BELGAUM — _ ‘
” I .._”=,,.APPE§,LAN’;’
(3Y…é:..Ri 1s0»\’fRi A-223A..:_u ,jj’A:>x?C$€:AT£:)
1 sM*r.’AR4UND’r+:A;ma’A(;AV 4
W/_{) SHANKAR’-NAVG
}1IN:3.U, F’EIviA,LE, ADULT,
« ,
fr_>,{oA..s}:,AN_I<AR NAG
. "-'_§{IN'DU,._FE}%€ALE, MINOR,
V DULY RE}?-'BY THEIR MOTHER
"AND__'NA'7FURAL GUARDIAN
SMT. ;_ARUI\¥D£%.HATi RAG,
~ ' Bo'm ARE R/AT' NO.65, SINGASANDRA
"»-BANNERGHATTA ROAED,
BANGALORE
' THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE co. L'I'I}.,
HAVING ITS REGD. OFFICE AT
ASAP' ALI ROAD, NEW DELHI
AND ITS BANGALORE REGIONAL OFFICE
11
AT LEO SHOPING COMPLEX,
RESIDENCY ROAD CROSS,
BANGALORE 560 00}
(BY SR1 RAGHU PRAsAD,:=5DI:o¢AT§..’ M
1′
THIS MFA IS FILED U/Ss1?’._3(}) 69 ‘MV A-:3?
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATE-D:30.10.’€.’2T “I_?AssE’;I) IN
Mvc NO.897/00 ON THE FILE 0.?’ THE VI._AD{)Lig CIVIL
JUDGE & MACTJI, BAIIGALQR-E–.(sCc:-I NO;’.2}, VMRTLY
ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETE-TIC–i_N F()R..CaQEv!PENSATION.
M.F.A. Ne-..1362_L2003: ‘
BETWEEN
UNITED £f#iDII.’¥.IAII?1S{J’F€;fiINC1E} ‘<30. 1;:m;',
No.22-2;: MISSIQII Ig_0AI)–,« . '
BANGALORE,' _ ' "
av ITS MAIIIAGER. ‘-
. . APPELLANT
(BYf~€§,RI: MAH’E3SH.__8§I¥’EENA 0 MAHESH, ADVOCATES)
*.gxIII)’ ~
1 ‘S%M’i’.’.’§R.{iIfJDHATI RAG
._w/ 0 l.A’£–E SHANKAR NAG
I{1cI~..I:».I~Io.63, SINGASANDRA,
BANGALORE.
ARUNQHATI RAG
“W/O LATE SHANKAR NAG
R/(}.D.NO.63, SINGASANDRA,
BANGALORE.
” ” ‘#3 MISS KAVYA
D] O LATE SHANKAR NAG
MINOR REP BY HER MOTHER
aV
NATURAL GUARDEAN
18? RESPONDENT
R/O.D.NO.53, SiNGASANI3RA,
BANGALORE.
4 MOHAMMEIZ) RAFEA
MAJOR _
S/O ABDUL RAZAK, :
No.3645, KHANJAR GALLL
BELGAUM. ,
5 OREENTAL INSURANCE (3C}’;”=L”I”[)., _
NC).2891–92, SEDDANNA cxjigaivigsgs, ‘ «-
KHADE BAZAR, ”
BELGAUM. 2 x v
“~…_’..’v.Rf§,SPONBENTS
(133? %sRA:”‘M”s&2§§r,Ri .RA§U;’ ADVCSCATE FQR R5)
THES MFA 13311.3}; 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST’
THE JUDGMENT Ammgxwagm«::)A’rE1:»;3o.1o.o2 PASSED IN
MVC ;s:o.39′:3;_00 c>N’TH§fJ*;’ILE OF’ THE Vi ADDL. CIVIL
JUDGE. _i’vIAC’P–2; BENGALORE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE
cLA1M_;fP’EP:T10N”‘FQR COMPENSATION.
Mr. 115436312093:
V .uN;’rE.:> 1r~zm;;”‘iNsURANcE (:0 LTB
$33.22-1; Mission ROAD,
‘ ” . *–3A;~¥<:n__ALo'RE BY {rs MANAGER.
.. . APPELLANT
(l§;Y SR} 0 MAHESH 5:. VEENA <3 MAHESH, ABVGCATES)
V " AN9
1 SMT. ARUNDFIATI RAG
W/O LATE SHANKAR NAG
V 6 MISS KAW5'
" *=.'1fI~Iis MFA is FELED U/S 173(1) 0? MV ACT AGAINST
1"HE.,J§}'DGMENT AND AWARD DA'I";"1I}:3(}.1(}.O2 PASSED IN
QMVC No.39?/00 on THE FILE OF' THE Vi ADDL. CIVIL
7'"-_JUI'f}GE, MAC'I'–2, BANGALORE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE
~ CLPsiM PETITEON FOR CGMPENSATIQN.
R] O.{).2\iC).63, SWGASANDRA,
BANGALORE.
2 MISS KAVYA
MINOR D/O LATE SHANKAR NAG I 4
RE? BY HER MOTHER NATURAL c:,_I,IIt\;:TeI;IIIA:s;’ ‘
IST RESPONDENT ” = _ ..
R/0.D.No.63,sINGAsANI3RA, ‘
BANGALORE. ‘fi_
:3 MDHAMMED RAFIA _ .– ‘
MAJOR,S/0AB[)UL”RAZAK_ ._ , _
N().364S, KHANJAR”GA–LL:_.__ BELG-AL:.M.-». _
4 ORIENTAL INESU RAN'(:Is:1é::jO.”Lf:*%I).’, ” ”
NO.2891–92,’SI£)Dfii_NNA-I{3HAMB’E33$,i
I<I~:ADE__ BAZAR,_-.BEiI{}A1_}.M,.__» V
5 sMfIf.%'_gIR'I;V§I-D1::§§:'I ~ 1' V
R10,0.N0.53,*«sI:sI(3-2{ISA:\I.:)RA
8ANC:'rAi.C)RE';'–
._’:_M11g_Q;\>__ …..
I}/C1 SHANKAR NAG
” –RE”I?_BY”HER MOTHER NATURAL GUARDIAN
15? DENT
. ‘R/O.[‘;.7N_Q;’63, SENGASANDRA,
“‘««13AI\I~(}I’5L£)P2E. I
RESPONDENTS
These appeals are coming on for final hearing, this
day SREEDHAZR RAG J., delivered €113 follcwingz
GP,
decision of the Supreme Com’: that the insurer 1::_;s;3vs “z1 o~,V
right to file appeal jointiy with the insured.
6. The petitioners have rum’1~.w.,a;1’§62,x2i><§3, 'A
1666/2003, 1665/2003 sea},
compensation and also assiégsrxgyéfit ' of
contributory negligence rig the, rextéjrsf 2-$31!'. ._5(}°/£4 6:1 tfie gart
ofcardriver. .. V .
7. One Moéhaj’ m_ Siaheb (,E’?W .5) who is an
eye-$vit11V€{ss” 4′ has lodged F.I.R.
immediateljéafter acc&}i’en:. The F’.i.R. is marked at
recii:a1s….i1′: the FIR. Show that the lorry
WaSé :,11r:§g1igent in causing the accident. The
in’ jrilspqtt mahazar and the sketch disclose
. W!
that thfi road runs c=::ast-West, the lorry was driven fi*om
“\:§?(tsfi–é:3.st. The car was coming from easbwest. The
” of impact is shown to be 5ft. away f{‘O1’I1 the
Dsoutherrz brim of NH-4. The road width is 24 ft. with
katcha road of 101%. on either side. The place of impact
and position of lorry as noteci in the mahazar cleémly
shows that the lorry was driven on to its :é*:f””
the read at the time of accident. This oev1e1,is.1y etmer
that the lorry was totally on the _
of the accident.
8. Sri Sowri Raju, c0tHise”l’l.for the the
lorry strenuously Athastwiltl’ ‘ease ofliead on
collision. Not withstanding fl–1.stvAAt;l1e’.’lor:’y was on
the extreme éléxrer of the car had an
Op§)0I’t”LlI1i{“}{_ to see lorry and could have
avoided me aeciden’t bed he been careful in driving. In
the doctrine of last opportuzlity is pressed
ifito”-lsferviee,?:o~V.:e(intenci that there is equa} amount of
V V’ _eom;rihutoryv riegligence on the part of the driver of the
H ‘A sit isvvflzrther submitted that there was a stationary
the left side of the road, therefore the driver of
T ofiending lorry had to swerve to the right side to
u A avoici the stationary lony. The car eomixlg from the
opposite direction was driven in a high speedfiio
negligent manner. The driver of the car on * M
stationery lorry and on seeing ofiefitfing f.9:1t:):i1¢3
have been careful and deceierated’ .
argued that there is equal of it
negligence on the part of the d1’i¥Je;t.:efVVt;’1e
9. After earefu1ly’.Vgoir;:g submission
and contents it are unable to
be perstiadetiii ” efgiiiimexitei of the owner of the
lorry. The ‘discloses that the lorry was
dxiveegon ext:;e1eVeV’ri”ghtV’si<ie of the read. The d0CtI'iI1€ of
is inapplicable to the facts of the
{tiziver of the lorry) is examined to prove
the theory' stationary lorry to seek exoneratien of
'; ,"'–;j,:_9;.'oi.3éty. However, the FIR and the recite}. in the
do not corroborate the theory of stationary
T P.W.5-eye-witness to the ixlciderit who has
[lodged the F.I.R. There is no mention of stationary lorry
1
This expenditure is i:1cu;*re<:i pureiy .VV"eiisii1ess
purpose and the members of the
directiy any benefit from the ether
expenses via, telephone' e)t13e2ft@s,
periodicals, petrol ma
eiectricity charges 'do the famfl};
members said it enjoyed by
the if the non-family
befiefit the go-ss annual incoxne
wotfigi " Fmther Rs.52OQ{);'– paid as
incatxleeterzv, "d.e€1tieted. The net income would be
5.” «1..,[.{%1’d 1:0 be deducted towards personal
‘ 173808/- p.a. would Eflliffi te the benefit
yeftthe tiegnerldants. The total loss of ciependenejg vmuid
be V:2§071i2f}/~(1738{)8 {i}I1C£)II}(‘3} X 15 {tz1uitip}ier).
Wife is entitled to Rs.25(}OG/~ towards 1053 of
eeI:sortium.; the petitie11ers together ezztitled te
E$,25{3{)G/- towards 1055 of expectancy anfi Rs.1()(}(}O
tewards funeral expenses. In ail, the petitioners are
4/
medical and ixlciderntal expenses by
inco3:rect. The claimant is exgigifzleci .t;o”‘r:§Ii;*z1§t.1r:~3(:L*1ei*1tL
of the emire madicai expef2ses”‘Ta;i1c§”TT»._élr5§{)’ i:§fi :a awarded by
the tribunal’ expenses.
Crfitiibifi inceme fmm. profession during
the ‘ Sf the getjtiener is ganted
Rr.3;’25.0{)Qx ai1, t11:e petitjonar is entiiiied to additiorml
of Rs.}25(}O{)/- with interestlat 6% 13.3..
._ “f1_:¥i21″41:*;i;§=§_ of the petition till payment in additizm ta I
{lie ctfiixzpéanaatjcn awarded by the tribunal.
The Ivi.F.A.1663/2003 flied ‘iay {ha petiiiimer fer
enhancement, is aliowed. The MRA 1362/2003 filed by
tha £.£1$11r€r is aiiawad.