High Court Karnataka High Court

Smt Papamma vs H S Umesha on 20 February, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Smt Papamma vs H S Umesha on 20 February, 2009
Author: B.V.Nagarathna
W 'FREE Hi(}H C.()Ui€'i' ()5 KARNA'l'Ai'§A AT BANGALORE?

DATED Ti-{ES THE} 20"; DAY DF' F'EBRU.e'\.RY_, 2009?'

BE}+'{3RE

mtg: H{}N'i:3Lh} Mi-ES. JLiS'§'i(;'.i;§ B.V.NAGAi€?,'1}H~1§'A  

M.;~tA.N<_).15uus;:g«:}{5?'::s;w; _  

Sm' PAPAMMA V' 
W / <3 su BRAMAN YA gig c;;i1s;Luv____;&;r;.._;'u._V

AGED 36 YEARS,    *  
S.-»"i'{}NE <::RUsi~iiI~ic;: '~vo':"<«2<;," _   ;
HOSANAGARA BELUR TALEJK,   
HASSAN §IS'FR§{."7f',   

 '   AP;-'§~LLAN'i'
{By Sm}: :  is?'   

,W§§lL.; 

1 H 5:: UIxiiE;&3I~j£A'._ , .
 Sji} Si1}£5APPi§ Nfiiié
 '?:.1~,,:gE";r§L_f_}{;._g:   ..... 14 v
 ' E=$i"f:;28,'="fTH €::R::;$$,
"  1:~5f4ii:<§_:%;1g'i§e Ream,
 «2:-..I{,*:».,s';*.:~%;::;:4;:, E{UVE3M?U NAGAE,
 BA:\:<:i£r_;L43RE: 76.

 2 "';j:¥i::~;i3RAN<;:~§ MANAGER

x j 'i"irv-iii {)!€lEN'i'AL iNfESURAi'é{_Zi:3 {iii}, E.A".i::.i)1'§
' [}.A.B. NO. 1 1, Nf_}.232f I9, PAVITHRA
H='S{L)i§'°fH,JAYA?~3:%GAR,BANG££L0§&'E3 11

,., RESPON D.§:}i'4'i'$5

ifily S1': ; A::;s~wi<; s4.:~zAYA;=;, sxmzzezs

 



"i'i-HS MFA Flmjli} £3/S }."?I.:3(_1) OF' M1! AC1' AG-A.§N§':'§i'
'"f'HE'3 JUDGMENT AND AWARI} DATED: 13.8.2001? PASSED
IN MEG NO. 1'7'i")4/' i§~£O{}£:3v OR THE FILE £3?' 'THE ADE}_L, 

JUDGE, MEMBER, ABEL. MACE', HASSAN3....__§?ART5Ji'F 
ALLOWING THE CLAEIVI PETITION FOR  _

AND SEZEKENG }:}NHAN{3£ilMEN'§' OF (3{}i¥'£Pb}i\i':5rA'£«',£__V()i\:;'T._ "

This appeal} <::cm1ing an fdzf o1ifi§§::*s§' 

court tieiiveraci the f0il0wi1"2g:, _

d U G 

This  is      ciaimant
sesekixlg  being aggrieved
333?' €513    passed in
 _'v;'{V§':*;V.&5.i3,{3{}'? by the Addi.

MAC!' ai 3555311'. '  W

 V'    ;*_sAieveLiitv*§§:<";ts of the cast: are that en 6.6.2004

 p.m., the ciaimant was c:r0s$i:r1g fieiur»

fiai_f: b6e(§.i1  near Yagachi Channel, at Balm' '1'{}w11

 -».xa%i1e£1".a{__ §'v1ar11thi car, bearixlg registration N0.i;§%--' was driven ii} a rash and zzegiigent 11:1a;":u:r.e:* arid at

  __a.5 high egwed and dashed againat the ciaimant. As a

resuit the ciaimami of which she feii down. and

sustained injuries. She was admitted to s'.3m:er11s1:ent

B,



Haspgitai at 56113:, Where shé teak treatment.

{:.onte11d'mg that she had sufiéred 

on account of iI1j1iI'i€S sustained ii} th6...%1¢€fidéA:it,4 :s£1t3T _ 

flied the 'claim petition seeking €;pmp¢ n:sé;t;id:1'c§n' 

heads. 

.3. in response to the 3;1o'i'3.§§i2..Msers?'&:c£  t}1é"~--T:Fi*i'i:iiI1ai, 

the first res'p011de13t :1"¥;_1nai11b::'d:». a§.1é<':%'-wag piaced
axparte and while   _:f§?s§%Qi1§ie1}t~msurance
company    st:atem::11t
dexiyiflg tghéi';fiét:»:{i?ié§-:9iaéifigatierzs made in the
ciaim d;'{:~*%iiiis»;.§a£ of the: petition.

4.   pktadings, the '1'ribuna.£
ifaggeti _t1"1éuf0i;l<§§§i1g.'Vis§i:1€s for its c<}nsi<:ie::'ati0n:

  W_£1ethe1* €116 petitioner preves that the
  " 4V%3;€.c§§{ie11t that took piace 011 6.6.2094 at
A  13.111. near Yagachi Gizamuei on

.V 4 Be§L1r«Haieb<=:edu Road was due to rash
and negligctnt driving of the Maruthi
Esteem bearing ,No.£{A--()3«N~49€3E3 by

its flfiivfii' and petitioner had Sustained

i2i'Pi3_1I'i€:S in the said accicient?

/%

 



ii) Whether the petifiorier is e'ntitiev:£ for 
COI1}}_Z)€11S€LtiOI1, if so for what amoLn"1't "-f""--. 

and from whem?

iii) Wh:-.1: order efdecree?   

5. in suppert of her case,   'e2f:mA7¥_:

herseif as PW 1 and got n1arKed 'i:§§:s.Pé'-1  

second resporzzierlt; did1 10t  efid'eneeJexeept
getting the copy' cf   marked as
E2x.D- 1. 011 t1f1e::A'i;:§.sis::"ef   record, éiéae
'£'ri¥::u11a.i  ;<)f: iée.8,:.:&:}s:)/- with
interest  of  the date ef claim
petition  satisfied with the said

award of ee:L<115eI1eetie;},"  claimant has preferred this

    eeeee 

,.g; .  1' iiasfe  the learned counsel for the appellant

afid   counsel for the second respondent-

* . ,. 4 44 ‘§I,}S£1I’iiII~t§€A ‘eempany.

v is submitted on behalf of the appeliant that the

v.c_1a_i§mant had sufiereci six abrasions on varieus narts ef
Vthe bodv and she had also taken treatment and that she

&

back, both iegs and at the back and the d0ctcr1″T h;1.d

opined that the injuries are simple: in i1atu1’t.=:. A’
CO11Si(i€1’i11g the fact that there: Wera sever<a1_'4_ja.b§*é $iQ:1é ' "
and the fact that she had takgzn t.i: 'eatL3;1éi1t'–.:ibr' j

iI3ji}3:'i6S sustained by her and 0Ver'V';a:£1.f;ies§%; of

the matter, an additional zg1$g1?arde(£
to make the tcetai The
enhanced compexzsafiofi… at the rate
of (3970 p.a. frgziil étiii deposit. 011

deposit sf ifaléafied to the appeiiant.

-i+'<}r the ' a1"'01~Esna3§:i_1t¢a3011S;"3;i_1€ ap-pea} is allowed in part.

Sd/-

Judge