INTEHBHKHICOURT(H?KARNATAKA
CHRCUTFBENCHIMFDHARHMJ)
DATED THIS THE 23TH DAY 09 AUGUSfi'~--2Q'f} 94''..' *'
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUsac*K:»E
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTIC'fi:'B,SRE3ENIV)&Sf3@C}0\iIDA " %
MFA z»Io,%99e"1%/:>;_ouo§AAmvjé
BETWEEN:
SR1 M£:HA.13ALE_SH\'JAR«»SHiRIi??ATI HEGDE
S/Or.SHRI1PAfTI"HEG.DE--.," .
AGED: YEARS=,?.'fiAGR1'CL§LTURIST,
R,lATjB_AL§3;GADDE' VELLAGE,
:.SIRSI'TALUK, A
'ME*NTALLY-».NOW*-ILJEBALANCED
RE.?/BY' H1's..'RA*rRER SREEPATI-II HEGDE.
A . .../APPELLANT
(BY;S'R1.HEG-DE;NEE-RALGI, ADV.)
. KUMAR s/0 R ETTIKAN
' AGES}; 32 YEARS, TRUCK OWNER,
R./A-M10. 1 :7/4, ANNA NAGAR,
TOIREYRU ROAD,
~ NAMAKKAL IN TAMIL NADU.
THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER
UNHTI)HHHAINSURANCE(X1LTD"
NAMAKKALBRANCH, if
A' are..:referred to as they are referred in the ciaim petition.
%/
NAIVIAKKAL,
TAMIL NADU.
. . .RESPO--N'DENTS
(BY SRI.M.G.GADAGOLI, ADV. FOR R2) '
THIS MFA IS FILED U/;SjAA'V1h73{1IARTLY
ALLOWING THE :.,_4fl'V.:'P.E3'TITIC'A)I§AI FOR
COMPENSATION AND SEE5.E{iENG-~«..EN,:HIA'NCEMENT OF
COMPENSATI{3tNf'. ' "
THIS?'r?I_P;1§§KI;:::"éiQ.M*IhI(ff} ON FOR FURTHER
ORDERS" J DELIVERED THE
FOLLGWING:v'V"wT It S
'vh'vVg§§éMENT
,, This is Vthe'c1aimant's appeal Seeking enhancement
» O'f--.oo:11pe11Sati_on for the injuries sustained in a motor
vehhiclev aéeicievnt.
" For the purpose of convenience, the parties
./'-
3. On 21.06.2001, the claimant Was travelling
in a car owned by one Susheela Narayan
registration No.CNE-7623 from Chitraduyrgasit Wylaierl
came near Halebatti village oil oavangegere
NH.4, the goods carriage.e'1.o.rryiibheiaringV.l'§£oiiKj3l--O:'l/DQCEV
4524, owned by respondent0N't)iiy:.'l itisfidriver in
a rash and negligent;:–irri’anIier1–_>cornin§g’fromtbe opposite
direction dashed account of
accident, injuries and
agriculturist. He
ownedyarecay paddy fields. He was also
a progressive fo1¢n1e_r”wli1o used to cultivate rubber and
Ve’n5’§1la_Li’crVop. “”‘i”{f:_._.S7V’aS also a social Worker. Founder
0 Balamandir in Neernalli. On account of
virtually became disabled completely.
There_fo:re, he preferred a claim petition claiming
vcofizpensation for the injuries sustained.
E
Kl/”
4. After service of notice, the first respondent
did not appear. He was placed eX–parte. 2nd resLpond,e’n.t
— Insurance Company filed statement
contesting the claim. However, :hey”did’i.not«
accident and the insurance coV’erag_e of
question.
5. On the aforeisaidp.’ -tribunal framed
the following three issues: V
1. proves that the
iiii in~_c1uestio’n'”occurred due to rash
” of the driver of the
bearing Registration
and Ashok Layiand Truck
hearing””Registration No.KA 01-13–4524, as a
of which, the petitioner sustained
V ‘ dries?
Whether the petitioner entities for
DJ:
compensation as claimed by him? If not
what is the quantum of compensation he
entities for and from whom?
Lg
3. What order?
6. In order to substantiate the claim, oribuehalf
of the claimant, his father Sripati
examined as PW-1. His wife ‘*
Dr.Ravish Tunga who treated hiin
3. They produced 193
as Ex.P1 to Ex.P193._. On ir’esi.r)Aon,dents, no
evidence was adduced.’ ‘ ‘ f
._ on consideration of the
aforesaid1natveria1i”or1~ held, that the claimant has
estapiished thatflthe accident was on account of the
‘ ‘n:egi__igent driving by the driver of the lorry in
q.uestionu–“.’f–:are1d therefore, actionable negligence is
estoblisioed. Thereafter, it took note of the injuries
A xsuistained by the claimant. The wound certificate
discloses that the claimant has sustained two cut
lacerated sutured wounds, injuries to the chest lung
R/.
contusion on left side and left arm swelling presentover
the left arm and left shoulder with humorou.s’.ifrre:’sen4t
middle 1 /3113 of scalp of left humorous
angulalion. He also sustained injuries :i«’.ei.’,”.
parietal region. C.T. Scan was if
he sustained diffuse also
sustained grievous injuries The
movement was restricted”; at Andhara,
rehabilitation’ challenged.
Because “injury sustained, he
has person. It took the
incomeiiiiofii Rs.3,000/– per month.
Doctor ej/idieri-oei’diiscl’oses 65% of the disability for the
“However, the tribunai took it as 50% to the
i”‘w_h7o_lex multiplier 14. Thus awarded a sum
of /– towards pain, agony, trauma and injury
-.i’:a:nd..suffering, Rs.l,50,000/– towards medical expenses
“other incidental charges like conveyance, food,
Ws”;i)ecia.1 diet, attendant charges, nutrition, Rs.20,000/«~
iv.
towards loss of amenities, Rs.2,52,000/– towards loss of
future income due to disability and
towards future medical expenses. Thus,
Rs.5,02,000/- is awarded. 1,./-kggr.ieve’_diiihhvhf,
judgment and award, the
appeal.
8. He has ii application for
additional eviclerzce. of hearing in
this Court, he was
kept learned Judges have
observed ” i
a look at the claimant-
is totally disabled from any
movement and without an aid or
he cannot even move an inch”
The additional evidence produced in this appeal
itdiscloses that the ciairnant is under treatment of
it H Dr.K.R.Sridhar of Andhara, Rehabilitation centre for the
V.
Hence, we allow the application for additional evidence
as they are subsequent documents and are
for deciding the claim of the appellant.
9. The learned counlseil
assailing the impugned jtidgrnentaxiandp
the disability incurred by account of
accident is now V1609/o from the
observations tY1i;§'”as the records
producecii, ivirpl deteriorating from
_i”‘i’h1e,rei’ore{the -.trViVb=.:’1nal was not justified in
day to i–day’.v.r
taking the disability at 50% to the whole
body, it as 100%. Secondly, he
c._ofitendsVp_ he Awasmavprogressive former. The income of
V is that of an unskilled labourer. He
‘got arecaiiplantations. He had introduced venilla in this
area and he was also growing rubber. He was aged
it ~.ab’cut 41 years. in those circumstances, the income
taken at Rs.3,000/» is on the lower side and it ought to
te/”
_iO-
have enhanced. Thirdly, he contended he cannot live
without attendants and therefore, this attendant
charges has to be incurred by the family throughou’t._Vhis
life and no compensation is awarded,§’_”for~i..’_ffutL1re_
attendant charges which ought to have””oee_nddgraiiiteid.”
He further contended the doctor cje1*tificsa.te~ s13ow’s._Ath,at
about Rs.4,000/– to 5,000!/r;’..QUg1;1′[». to be i’ino»;i;e;~gd..every.V:i’
month towards medicines,….vv:’Therefore;t.t,heJaward of
Rs.25,000/- towards”4″futL1re__i’nedi’ca1..expenses is wholly
inadequate. vL:ast_1y, thatVV’Vthe claimant has
become Theirefotjegddian award of Rs.25,000/~»
towards.__1″oss is on the lower side and
therefore, ‘the a substantial enhancement of
«compensation ought to be awarded.
~ contra, the learned Counsel for the
supported the impugned award.
-11-
11. From the aforesaid facts, it is clea_1f_,_’ the
claimant was aged about 41 years on the date
accident. He was an agriculturist. He owiied
garden. He was cultivating
introduced Venilla. According
earning Rs. 150,000/– periannrum. “He, social’
worker in his village. rrierriiberg of the
Balatnandira in Neernalli. of the injuries
sustained, ud_i,saloled and all his
activities medical evidence on
record’ he suffered three
injuries sutured wounds, tenderness
was” “present govier left side of the chest and
tenderriess’«,__was present over the left arm, swelling
the left arm and left shoulder with
hu’1norious’;i present middle 1/ 3” of scalp of left
“‘r1u,rr1or’ous with lateral angulalion. After the accident he
shifted to Bapuji Hospital, Davangere. Thereafter,
11 “he was taken to Nimhans Hospital, Bangalore for
kw/,,.,
,. 12 _
treatment of head injuries. After prolonged intermittent
treatment, he was also taken to Ajit Manochetana
Hospital, Sirsi and also to Dr.Samba Murthy,vat_iSirsi.
As there was no improvement in the menta§l””Stia’tu:s’, _
was taken to SCS Hospital, Mangalorem-:.::jWhen’–AVtl1,at”
treatment did not yield any result, nad,_beenit’aker1::,to
Manasa Nursing Home, Shi’In,oga.”v. In tIiep1*ocess, he,’
has lost his memory and____he__’nas bec.ome_ii mentally
imbalanced and unable’ to his day to day work
and he requiires to keep his
mental conci._iti_on.,% as:”~s_tabl_*e. If the medicines are
discontinuedifor ‘=ai1y””«re’a’son, he becomes violent and
wo1;11d_be difficult to control him for some time. The
treated the claimant at SCS Hospital,
been examined. He has categorically
stated—i:that the claimants present mental condition is
, ”pce.rrnanent in nature. It cannot be improved. He has to
iiijundergo treatment for the said problem throughout his
it it “life. According to him, the disability is 65% to the Whole
_ 13 _
body. The records also disclose that a sum of
Rs.70,9-41/– has been spent towards purchase of
medicines as prescribed by the doctors. to
EXP183 are the receipts showing
expenditure. The additional e\_r_ide.nce
case discloses that he is
“Andhara”, rehabilitation for”rrientgii:1i_yi”ch’ai1er1ged’.’V: T’
The observations of this Court”p_:rel’orred to-aboive makes
it clear he is he was not
examined i_n~.t_h–e case, “unable to depose.
Therefore,l”his _yfather.i”a_nd._ wife are examined. Under
these circuInst_ances,””Wei.”are of the View keeping the
income. of lithe; claimant at Rs.3,000/– as taken by the
award a sum of Rs.2,52,000/– in addition
. awarded by the tribunal towards loss of
fiiture-5 :ir1corr1e/ permanent disability treating the case as
“1VOQ”/oiifunctional disability for the Whole body. Now, the
bexridence on record clearly establishes he cannot move
iiiwithout any aid of attendant that would be the position
-14″
throughout his life. No provision is made for future
attendant charges. In those circumstances, we
proper to award a sum of Rs.2
aforesaid head as minimum of
to be paid for attending him.
record shows he may per’.
month towards rnedical hisiilast: day. As
his condition is possible guess
work could In the facts, we
deem it ‘ Viakhs towards future
Rs.25,000/– towards
loss ofi5’m’i1’3riities:’i:~.iibi'( lower side. We add another
Rsi;50,Q0O./–“»underithe aforesaid heading. Thus in all
the would be entitled to a sum of
in addition to what has been awarded by
the tri’ou1’ia1. Hence we pass the following order:
via) Appeal is allowed in part.
b) In addition to what has been awarded by the
tribunal, we award a sum of Rs.7,02,000/–
iaifi//’ ‘
-15-
as additionai compensation, which-.___sha11
carry interest @ 6% per annum
date of petition til} the date of M
C) Parties to bear their’J0m\}vf1′ r:p§;ts..y ‘.
Application for additibizgi dccuxmg-nts %is.1Aa11gwed.%