High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri M L Puttappa S/O Lingegowda vs Smt Sunita Gupta D/O S K Gupta on 12 October, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Sri M L Puttappa S/O Lingegowda vs Smt Sunita Gupta D/O S K Gupta on 12 October, 2009
Author: N.Ananda
IN THE HEGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2009'-'E.'

BEFORE

THE HONELE MR. JUSTICE N. ANANDA ,1"   

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST A1>PEA1,EANOALORE-- 1. ... RESPONDENTS
(Sr1...«.2;\/1. NARAYA}'»IAPPA_, ADVOCATE FOR R2; R1--SERVICE

'A V'  OF NOTECE  DISPENSED WITH)

" _  APPEAL FILED (3/8 17311} OF MV ACT

1AGV"'--NS'1'" «1'_1:1_E'..;';3'UDCMENT AND AWARD DATED: 4.8.2008

PASSED IN 1'v'fVC NO. 2690/99 ON THE FELE OF THE VIIE ADDL.
JUDGE, COURT OE SMALL CAUSES, MEMBER, MACT--V,

 'g_ME'TRO.POLITIAN AREA, BANGALORE. {SCCH.NO.5}. PARTLY
 THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATEON AND
SEEKENG ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

 _f'1'§-IIS APPEAL COMENG ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS

*  OAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOVVING:



J U D G M E N T

This is a c1aimant’s appeal for enhancem’ent_<'_i'of

compensation.

2. I have heard Sri Rainaehandra. Ft.” it

counsel for claimant.

3. The claimant had suffered frfla-ctiire oi’v:ne;c1«:.._VoVf

femur. The claimant was aged ahbnit years the time of
accident. The claimant.._Rwas _a First Division
Assistant in P. L. D. _ Bank’ at ‘ * .

4. suffers Vhf1″ofri””residua1 effects of
injury. it has his work. Neither there is

reduction of._sa1ary’norA.raxik;. The claimant has not produced

dociifigients to he had suffered loss of earnings

A V ‘ ‘ . 2 dating pVe1’iod:o–f treatment.

” ‘ ‘t.’fTh§;’;:=.vV’V’1’ribuna1 has awarded compensation of

‘V Rs. under following heads:-

M (1) Pain and suffering: Rs.25,000/-

1,M..

qv. s::…/

3

(ii) Medical expenses with
incidental charges : Rs.25,000/–

(iii) Loss of amenities : Rs.-40,000/–

(iv) Future medical expenses: Rs.10.000.pf’–*–.»p

6. On hearing learned counsel for claimantid»

the considered opinion that compensation awai*ded:VA_ib3v?’ the _& it

Tribunal towards future medical :expenses7.is-:’inadequ’ate.l7

The Tribunal should have awarded ‘r.:otriz.1_pensatiA:.)n’v towards V’

conveyance charges, nourishinent foot:’._l attendant
charges. Therefore, 1 award .eornp.eji1slat,ion of VRs;’20,0O0 /_

towards future medical ~ towards

conveyance _t food and attendant
charges.vlA”iIjhus, ‘entitled to a total Compensation
of Rs.:.i,..15,ooo/}a » A V
‘AIn”ChA\€ Pass the followir1g:–
l l énnnn
The Appeal is accepted in part;

” . :3 (ii) The impugned award is modified;

-“}*\§ .. /-..,w.g”L.’-” E

RKK/–

{iii)

” (iv)

Compensation of Rs.1,00.000/–
the Tribunai is
enhanced to Rs.1,15,000/– with

awarded by

interest at the rate of 8% p.a.f”‘–”

from the date of this petition ii

the date of reaiisationqa

Parties are directed Vdto hear th’e–ir” . «. V’ ‘

costs.