High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri Inayathkhan vs S Raghunath Naidu on 26 February, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Sri Inayathkhan vs S Raghunath Naidu on 26 February, 2009
Author: B.V.Nagarathna
?*='3&'é'-...N<::~ . L153? 3* . Z:'{3€C3'?

:3 'me; 1-i£{.}H ovum' av' :<;.Am~zA*mm AT 1:sAm;A1.;£)_I;e1:;
DATED TI-1:3 THE :36??? DAY OF' FEBRUAR§;,__i;.§§i§%,$'~.'«:.. 
BEFORE    
'£"!~iI:iZ H(_}N'BL!:; Miesgu::s'1':<;i3;"'B'.'vmrg;A§.;A:§éA;§v'5_:§:g~'.T. 

M.b'.A.N0.153'?§)Ii§i§(i'?

BETWEEN:

sax 1NAYA'£'HI~if§AN_
S/(L k'A.ZULLAK§{AN',- '
AGED 29 YEARS3, " _
17Q;A, L;%;i{ARA?ALAw. _ _ 
GANGc3Nm;,HAL:x,1,:  
BAN_r:--.aAs{o,£§_fa:--e-_3s;*__  «  .

5 .-   ' ,..APP§:lLLAN'l"

{By s:'~i:%"N;;~:.g§issH'f¢i}§}J§"mica, ;éiT§"x!'.V'i«'0i< SR!' 5 935.5401),

A.J!f;Q+2

1  .RAG1~mNA'm Mwu
"  5/V  1<z0 GUINDY,

3 M RAHEEM KHAN
S} 0. M(}HAMMi:Zi.) KHAN,
MAJOR,
100 1 }.TH CROSS,

i§&§§Sl£'l§iI%§1@b!»1-



Ev

i'=";?:}3s.1'~i--<3. '_i§$37§%3."'{Li=if}"?
_. L; ..

'*1. Whether the pefiiianer proves that he
suszained griqvaus injuries in road tmgjfic
accident occurred on 323. at abvui 8,3t'}p,m._
at Mysore Road near B.B.£nc€2'on on acxrazzrzt of
aciionabie negligent driving of the ciriazer of  ..
lorry bearing No.KA-0.5/A-5409?    ..._ " »

,2. Whether the pe tizio:;;:2j   
eanzpensaiionfrcm   ' ' A V Z

3. What order?"  2 V' '
6. In support of   exagfiifised himscif
as PW.1 and 0136 Dr. and got marked
Bx.£'1 to Pm"   msfihndagfziié evidence of RWK1

and markiid     r K 5
Tr'. _.*E3I3.- _1:ifi€:  ba"é;§sV_0i7_.t§3gé matefiéi can recoré the 'l'11"¥:)uI1ai

aWa1'cf£,d Rs'. 1,:'37,'2{X3] - wéth interest at 7'/o
pua f1*o1n.'V"'»:ii:gr:t9A dafé  pefifion tiii realization. Not being

 withV'fi1s:V:s§aid&:award, the claimani has §}1"£:fEI'£'E:£i this

 £_.i2zi§§:  the icamed csunsai fer the ajppcliant and

 the  counsezi far the second respondent.

A ‘ _” ” it is submitted on behaif of the apjgciiant that in Kim

instant case the aypeliant had suffered fracture of the right

{£2131}? and had undergone Sumcizf and there Wem inxniants.

/5/a/,.

§’W.2-doct0_r had been etxaminad W130 had stated that he had

31;ifl%:r6d disabiiity to an extent of 1?,s% and it also

deposed that thfi aypcllant was an auto “§a.§£1x:4.¢:’

circumstances the “i’ri§3u1mi ought 1;0 §i;a{r:: Itkie

monthly income cf the appcifiapt to Vbgféat I L,

and acccrdingiy awarded mg yimm
earning capacity. fiwaxd made
on the head of pain ri’S lower side and

prays for cnhai3c;§:?Ee1it <33? tfiéc V.

10. “I?’éi* the lealned counsei for
thr: _the ‘1’:ribunai did not bsziieve that
the appeiia1it’=zvas__ the auto or that he was the ewner

of ‘iihétiaufp, $,i:i;t:e._£11ere was new cormborative evidence in the

‘ fem rgf Licence or the R.C.Book so as to coxxciude

“that £16 earning ixzcomc fmna the auto. Under the

the ‘l’ribu13aJ. was justififi in assessing tbs

., “fi<3t_:.i<:s:a e"1l income at Rs.3£}(.}0/ –p.m and accordingly has

a ju$t cxrmpensation on the head of 1033 of future

capacity. He further submits that the awaxti made

cm the other heads are also reasazaable, which does not caii

for any irzterferemré. //L'/'x

f?§ff–':.§'~i«;:é. 113339 . 26?}?

_. : ..

loss of amanities fair which £<s.2(.},{){}0j– is awarded, making
the total compensaticn to l<s.39,U{}{)]~ which is of
to i€s.4(),{)0{}f=~. The enhanccd cnmpfixzsation
award made an the fixture medica} expenses; '

intarest at 6':'r'0 pa Emm its date of {;~§tt_iiio11 fii1V' u u

deposit ofthc said amotmt the same shall is
apyfifiafitw _ . –

115. For the afcsrcsaié . in
Pflnin the abova

5d,…

KV.N*