Loading...

Sri Arjun S/O Sri Sheeranga vs Sri P Krishnan S/O Sri Perumal on 28 October, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Sri Arjun S/O Sri Sheeranga vs Sri P Krishnan S/O Sri Perumal on 28 October, 2010
Author: N.K.Patil And H.S.Kempanna
IN THE HIGH COURT OF IUXRNATAKA 

I)ATE1:) THIS THE 28'?" DAY .01? 4ocfI"'C)'I:sII%iIjR,"'20:-O   " "

PREsENT:j»9
THE HON'BLE M91-:{_§JI}S'FICF; II.KR;'RATIL. 

THE HONBLE 1'I/'FR.AJ:--IJS;(1'ICELVHEAS-.,KEMPANNA

.I._M.F.A;N:I..;2;25--4;A/2(5Civ6;{M'V;)

s/0 SR1     

AGED 42 YI<:ARs,'QcC_: NIL.   

R/O C /0 NANJUNDA REDIJY.  I

KAMANAHALLI. KUGU'IRU'.PO~ST~.~"

SARJAPURAJIOBLI, AN_E'KAL TALUK

   I  .....   APPELLANT

{BY sIv:T.=I3'QRSLIISITITIIAI'RIa'oR SHRI SURESH MLATUR,

   P.wKRI$I?iNAN

 .3/0- $1921 RERUMAI.
H =..__p,GiI«:: MAJOR
 occ: BUSINESS.

V"  I ~ I R'/.o"vENNAMRAI.III

 j 'IvI.ALIIINAYANARAIII,I POST
 jIAsS_ED.j_IN "~..1_\/WC"._NQ.5939/2004 ON THE
FILE OF'THE;_J'UI)C}_E;~f_C\O'6RIf OF SMALL CAUSES &
MEMBER,"AIIACT,M-ETROPOLITAN AREA, BANGALORE
[SCC--_Hw9},'A'P;A.RTLY --Ai';«LOWiNG THE CLAIM PETITION
FOR 'COMpENSATI'ON-A.IAND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT
OE COMPENSATION.  " '

 "THISa PLF§PE3AL' COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS

 »  _ IZAY, EQPATIL;'J;-;"DE'.LIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT

~ hciugh this appeai is listed for Orders, it is taken

A 50′ finai disposai with the COI1S€I1T. of both parties.

2. This appeai is directed 21gai11S1: the impxigiled
judgnlerii: and award delted 5.10.2005 passed in

M.V.C.NO.5939/2004 On ‘iI}”lC file Of the Jtidge, COLIN”, Of

if
4?’
.:?n=7′? A

the body and on account of which .

treatment in the hospital as an i.n.:«..patier_1’t’ ‘a’r1d’_’:vhas ‘spent it ”

reasonable amount towards fi’:on*=§ey’anee.”‘ _Iioi,zl1<.ls-hlin_g

food, attendant charges ap_aI=t_ from Vmedliealpexpenses.'VV '

The doctor has assessed right lower
limb at 42%. Clairriing the claimant
appellant fi1ed.v.elai§n respondents.
The said ttpmbefore the Tribunal
for "and;a'alter""'eia1'eful examination of the
oral and and other relevant

material i'o.1'1" records, Tribunal allowed the claim

in partand awarded Compensation as stated

aggrieved by the same, the appellant has

presented the instant appeal claiming enhancement of

'::oriipe11satioI1 on the ground that the cornpensation

___}awarded by the Triburial is inadequate and the same

requires e1'1haneernent.

5. We have heard the iearned Counsel for boythy the

parties.

6. After Careful evaluation of ..

record and on a perusal of the a-nldl”awa;rcl

passed by the TriburialVand docuinen’tar3::v.eyider1oe._l>

what emerges is that the __’__Fl:lri]::)_u-nyal in not

awarding reasonable. eompegnsationyylunder the heads

loss of l”‘arr1Ae;:1itie%s”~and”*-diseomiort and loss of income

during.yt.reat.1nent’:e«tieriodlll It is not in dispute that. the

appellant “ii as u_r’;-.der_goiine treatment. in the hospital from

to The doctor Who has treated the

has opined that claimant. is suffering

vpernianent residual physical disability to the

ext.e1″it bf 42% to the right lower limb and 21% to the

body. Taking into consideration the nature of

it “injuries, the treatment. undergone, the period of bed rest

and follow up treatment taken by the appellant as per

the advise of the doctor and discomfort and

6

unhappiness suffered and having regard to the fact. that
he is a stone cutter by profession and due the

injuries he cannot. work as effeetiveiy as he was

eariier, we award a sum of Rs.25,000/-

and sufferings’ as against Rsf.”iI;000/–.;,< of

Rs.12.000/~ towards 'loss of inoorne during' 'treat;rn'etr1t–.V

period' at the rate of Rs.4f§'000/– pe1'..V_Irio:§f1thiv_for three

months and of "amenities,

unhaippiI;*esi;;. d'i~se'on1fort"' against Rs.15,000/-
awardedffbythe vflowever, a sum of Rs.5,000/–

towards rnediealv-.eXpenses and a sum of Rs.62,400/- is

j1.'iSf'&1i'1d 1:easona'o}e'Var1d does not call for interference.

For._t_he foregoing reasons. the instant appeal.

filed by.t_he'appe1iant is allowed in part. The impugned

Ajudgfmeizit: and award dated 5.10.2005 passed in

'i'A."f\}".C.No.5939/2004. is hereby modified. The

_._§appe1_1aat. is entitled to total compensation. of

Rs.1.24,-400/» as against R383.-400/~ awarded by the

%

_,_..,o,,

.5.

(.-

Tribunal. Thus, the enhanced COI11p€11S3{_i”(35]’1 *1tQ’

Ra”-341,000/– with interest @ 60/o»…p,_a. t”;’c3rii” V

petition till the date of realizatiora, ‘

The second responde–rif~w..5 InSuran_cev-,_C’Qthp-ahy is-V

directed to deposit’ ,.+,1}e cA’c0rr1«pen.saiL3ion with
interest within four of receipt of a
copy of the V’
On the entire amount
shall be re1eae.ed'”i11’V.fé_;;;oi:{i?A3V0f Vinédmediately.
OffiC€’ is -gixvhard accordingly.
AA ‘- Sdg;

…..

3,35;

.3 533$

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. More Information