Eaxaggézgégg me’?
EN was gzgg Sfiflfi? QF KARnA?AKA,A@;$&gQg$$§éf’v
agwas wars TEE §”‘aA§_a?_§E§R駧?;§é1§:’
BE§QRfi§ ‘”
was §$fi’ELE MR.J§$$;cE L §Ag$gA§§”s§gM2″
§$?.A,E3.932§F2§$s{§v§.m.,
BETQEEE:
1 SR: A§§E*§ Agsgyag ‘.._ _
530 K%§fi$§§A*, i” ‘”_ H«wg
A§a§-4§ fgAR3;_ w. ‘ ‘V »
ssa%§:;=’ ={e =»= 1
axe xg$ERz§A$gg,.g “gva?§RA
$3123 F:EL§vR§g§L’§AfiGAaQR3 gas?
gAxa%zcR2V§??af’ “»”*’%
&§?ELL&flE
éfigfip mfigfimwéafigmagwg
: V – . . . . . ..
Ԥ figzzgggasyssvfizggafisa
g;T”$3.’
.3, 9
fi g R$&$ ;
S§i$;}¥’§’E§.E%€AGAE
RE$§Q§EE§?
7f»§ %gyV$$:§ K ggaaaaggaavg }
~j””%a:g xyg @3233 ggg :?3:3; Q? xv 5g?
V fa$g:§s$ $33 JUBGMEET Afifi &fi&R
_*fiAT$§:1?f§%f2§$§ §AS§E§ 3% gvs §Qg1§3§fE$Q? 9%
‘wag 913$ 9? 2&3 XVEEX Asansgamggg Cfififi? c@
$E&§L §A§EES§ fifi %fiEERgEé£Tw§; gafififififififig
(scc-4), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION
FOR COMENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT, OF
COMPENSATION. 7 4
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS -mags.
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ip
JUDGMENI”
For the reasonsidstatedd in iflISQ.CVi.ph
7754/09, delay of 21 days is oondoned. E
2. Though the5 matte; “is ;posted for
hearing on I g], With the oonsent of both the
parties, the natteriisVheard*and disposed of.
$, *ThehflMQAiC;T’;: Bangalore, by its
Judgment pand .aNa;d= dt. 17.4 2008 in MVC
~__NOgi53§/200§”has awarded Rs.56,000/~. Against
h; which; this appeal is preferred.
4 ‘The learned counsel for the appellant
mW_ submitted that in view of the wound
doertificate ~ Ex.P9 and Doctor Report ~ Ex.P8
“~~and.iP10 — medical. prescriptions and another
injured. has suffered ‘two injuries for which
only Rs.30,000/– has been awarded. pfience,
the appellant is entitled for enhandenent of »
compensation by another Rs.l0¢Q0O/¥munder*this’h
¢ ,
I ..
head. In respect of loss »bfI aaefigepéaj
Rs.15,000/~– has been a\}3ar*ded Vw’hichAA’-revq1:.i;red w L’
to be enhanced by. another_*Ra.lU;¢Q0/L. For
medical expenses, “a§n§ey§aaé5[§§d, nourishment
only Rs.5,00_:J/e_ which is
enhanced FY afi§hhe§ és}:9;Qaa2;: For the loss
of earning dfirihg the period of treatment, the
Tribm;.g1-. gas’. 6, 000/-. Calculating
two months treatment in the light of the wound
–n certificate and also nature of injuries, the
.7 injured must have under gone rest for another
two” m¢nth$}?’ Hence, another Rs.5,000/– has
‘hbeen.anarded. The appellant is entitled for
vdadditional compensati%% of Rs.35,000/–.
7. Accordingly, the appellant is entitled
for additional compensation of Rs.35,QOQ7f.
which also carries interest as directed by’M
the M.A.C.T. Judgment Wend .awa£ddVetan§~.
modified accordingly.
‘
FUDGE