High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri.D.T.Babu vs R.Murali on 3 February, 2011

Karnataka High Court
Sri.D.T.Babu vs R.Murali on 3 February, 2011
Author: N.Ananda
" '  : With}

EN TEIE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANCxALOR.E)

DATED THIS THE 03*") DAY OF FEBRUARY 201  

BEFORE'.

THE HONBLEL MRJUSTECE N.ANAN'r;'g§  

M.F.A. No.5377/2909 {M1351 M

BETVVEIEN:

Sri.D.'§'.Babu

8/ o Dodda 'Ihimma.n.11a
Aged about 21 Years
Gopalanahafli Village
Chaliakere '1" aluk
Chitradurga Districi
Now R/at C/o Kiran
No.20. 11 Cross. IE4_1\/13111
Near C.M.C. Ol."fi'ce";__.' _ ..
Bon1rnanak1a}1i, "Ba1igai'or(e." _ 

{By Sri.Sh11fi-ad.\f;'C§haSéri..  

AND:  ._ --

1.

R.M1é:a1i_ _ V _
S/ o B.M_.Ie_I”;-._l.\}l!{\.C’l1

3. Conn of Small Causes, pa1″i.ly allowing the (§If:1_.i.¥.”J.1_”f){?L’}ElV{3]’]”fbf’
compensatioré and seekzirlg enhaneemer1{ of coInper1:$.atéE):<:.ff~ ~-

The appeal coming on for hearing thi–¢:»..d}»:y,'V"§l2e–ACouft.

delivered the followizlg:

JUDGrn§_l_§I

This is a claimanffs,_éippeal.”fer’ enijalfieelrhent of’

compensation.

2. I have heardv_v:’S1fi.Sh:ipé{d “V;’.:3l1astri, learned
counsel f()r_” 4Clai rnaVi1t eihdéel =S19i.uM;’S.S1″iram, learned
counsel fdr’VVins’t3:1fari’t:e «eeféipefiy.

a accident, the claimant had

suffered uf0–l1ow*i1jg.’

a] injVi1r=’=’-to the right upper and lower limbs
.VeXpo’ei1:g”L1nder lying muscle and bone and severe

‘ ecm_t’emi1fi’a:_i(;–n of the wounds.

bl of right humerus.

«V C) F 1:a::fu1feVof medial mallelous of right ankle.

Vascij’1ar injury to the right upper limb

ll ‘R.:«1d1’al nerve 1’njur_y to the right upper limb.

.3 =

E .

., :f’.;::,7ém, ‘V ::?m in –

IimbV,.§§eVars ugly’ Ther

There is fusion of right elbow 3’01’

1′) Fra.et.u1*e shafi. ofrig}’1t. femer

4. The elairrlant was treated in SPAR

‘ iémsgiif-:a’j’.s _

The fracture was reduced by open:”red–i1’eti’e-r1’¥.Var1d

internal fixation. The skin vv:§;:._s g§r’af1’iedo».on”tthe

area. During

from 26.05.2007 to 19.07′.2u00_f/w__a11d” ‘c{11.ri11Lg; second

admission, he was 24.10.2008 to

04.11.2008. Asper claimant had

spent 21 surrliof 1.1-43/9. :.fvAs_ her the evidence of
PW.2 m~ of eiaimant marked
as per limb and right lower limb

of the c:IaAi’1’2:1e111j Eire “deformed state. The right “upper

e is loss of muscleééon the
V

nt. The

also right: fore arm are thin.

j 5… right lower limb of the Claimant is in a

the first admission,’-h_e wasa1%;.”i’.e..s¢{1:ieI1t”

1
2

{*4

4-‘–4 .

IV Attendant charges in entire life ~

{V A «Loss of future income ~

ankle 30111.11. and rleglzaviilg injury c)f1′.l1e right: l0we’:f_l_imb’

There is loss of muscles of right: lower limb. eilizhetje

are ugly scars on riglat upper and lower lirrl’«blf’1?Qn1l’wh’ere

the skin was taken for graft1’11g;’
aforestated.

aged about 19 years and Sl’L~l.lI:§’ii:»1iI”}1’Il.1’gl” work.
Consequent to injurizeg hisullright upper
and lower limb have useless.

The clajmanj, of accident.

The affect his marital

l3r()SP§’-‘C:ts;’ ” 1 .. fl

6. lTh_e” Tri’b_Lr;r2lai awarded compensation of
RS.7&3,000/–l.lt}1*2¢:l§;T;f_f;)llOWifig heads:

Rs.50,000
Rs.25,000
Rs.25,000
Rs.25,000
Rs.3.2’4,000

_V Pa1’I’;.ar;dv s_uffer1’ngs »«
If 1,o:;g;<n{ a;'1'£le:'1ities ~

III A Phj,/'sieall disability W

At: the time of a(:(i4ide1'2::, the:vc:Alai'manI3; xvas–;

VI Medical expenses ~ Rs.2,_7_4,000
VII Incidental expenses ~

'I'ota.l »

Out of the total Compezisatjon aw'a"rd'eld,. suymgofl ' .

RS2, 74,000,' ~ was awarded " i tows:

expenditure.

7. On hearing. parties and
after going through physically
seeing the I am of the
awarded by the

Tribu:,f1al t,lA1’l{_i€IfV 3’4the._’l”‘h,ea.d.’ ‘loss of amenities and

enjoyr11e:1_t”of life’ g$:1.,j1’o”x}ver side; so also, under the

head’ “loss o»f,yearni’:r1g capacity and future loss of

‘”earf1jr1g”s’. _”Ph_e Tribunal has not awarded compensation

“tin-lder ‘loss of earning during laidup period’.

The”-con#1:j)er1′;sation awarded by the Tribunal under other

5

6

8. As already st’:a1’ed_. the elaimant. was stisigaiixing

by manual. work. The consequent to the ac:ti”ci’e.’iflt.,.V’vv3r1.is

right upper limb and lower limb have

functionally useless. Tl1ere–fe’1’e–,.A I-‘_ d..etjern_:in’e7«’ the

permanent physical disability §’is«’a_g{iis ldo-,3ls”of’~ ea1*r:ing..

capacity at 70% and It earnings of

claimant. as Rs.3.0QO.per ;é;1’ci11th:. ;l’h_us, elaiinant would

be entitled for compensz1t’i0n»vefVRsgl4,AA53€E300/~ {Rs.3,000

X12 x18 x O._70)_t:ndé:t earning capacity

and future” The Tribunal instead of

ding ercyninelzsationfj{1r1_de.f’ the head ‘future medical

eXpenditu1’e’vVV’has«. of Rs.25,000/w under

the head ‘Attendant ehtargesnidn entire life’. Therefore,

cc;fr’n”pensa.1:.fo1i1″eV. awa1″dedV’Wt1A11der the head ‘Attendant

chafges’_in’n*e.n’ti_re VVI’:’.fei~ is deleted and compensation of

:AfiRsv.25,OO0./Vw v_.is_l’§’~Vawarded towards ‘future medical

” eXpen’chture. -are 5g;_’;;2a,- ; v

5

‘eel

10. In the resuit, I pass the feliowilag:

(1)

(ii)

(iii)

ORE) ER

Appeal is aceepized in part. V

The ilnpugned eLward 3iS’ee, mediffed

enhan eirlg (:01fn[_3er1sé1tiO1a of 1 . vf-Vie. 7,33,;{)0VU,/ ;

awarded by tribufiai» to

The rest efv-ih_e.’VAawavf-d._V_”it reiates to rate of
interest, pe1fied’L’fo;f _ _01’f interest and

.1iabi’1ity 0f1″eepe:1_CIeij_ts is “c~0i1fi1’med.

‘ ;§iI1.d,e’ifi”a{e’stn1ent shali be in the

V1 __ i:he”i.}ibu1″121i.

” ” Paftieete {heir costs.