BQTHEHK§iCOURTOFKARNATAAATEANGALGRE
Dated: 'This the 35"' day 0f AI.1gL1st: 22009
BEFORE
=1'm: Hc';>N'BLE MR.JUST}C:E v.JAGANNAmm§é
M.P'.A.No.'?'95 / 2003 MC?
m3TmE-F":
SR} MARU'I'HI
S/O HALAVALLI V
EXGEIZ) ABOUT 3:2 YE;aRS,"~V..V , V .
R;AT KOTESHWARA PQST AND Gi'€*AM1%,':
KUND:'sPUR'A TALUK, ' "A --_
15023131 [}ISTR£Cfi'.'~~.__ 1- , V
~ " APPELLANT
(By S::"PAv.§;1%»%',é €fi;§;{,*xN'1:$.i%A"s§!%:'B*:Y:'":? 1%, ADV.)
AND :
.1. _ sM*:"';;A¥As:-.n«:'r3_2::"-.%:AATRA
; "'t'sij€,} s E3-E;D§~iANAi\¥ rm CHAATRA
D;L¥RVGAM8A.._§21QTORS,
, 1'-'M; 1?, KUNDAPGRA,
L;13U{;:>.I ":3.¥_bTI2Ic'}*.
1:2.'-% 'i*H?::Ij{;>I%:i€NTAL §NS{§RAN{fiE Cf}, };fI'D.$
I3i'~'a»'fiS}iONAL OFFICE,
12132:? FLGSR,
VVfi§flfl}PRAKASH'BUfiKHNG,
* COURT ROAD, UEUPI.
f REP;BYITSEHVE§QNALffifiNAQER.
HSRESPGNDENTS
'T {By Szti C. sHAN:«:AI2A REBDY, ADV, FOR R2)
'l'HiE§ MFA r«*:LE:;> U/S 30(1) 01:' W.C.. ACT AGAf( NS'I'
"mg JUDGMEENT DATED 26.11.2007' Pagggiéiis'--- j':L:~;-..
WCA:CiR~31/NF/200:6 ma THE FILE 0;: THE.
(TJFFICER AND CEJMMISSKJNER FOR'...,.§s3Q:e:§MEre "
(Z1OMPENSA'l'1{)N. UDUPI xjxisrlzéiéififfi«z;t;2;19;_ _"§?51;ff;"i;'§%
A1,:,c;>wING 1';--ir.: CLAIM PE']'£TiC)N*.FC3R ~'c(>z~;1z:f'=;~:941:s;§r;*¥_j<3r_.4'-.
Am) SEEKING {CNHANCEMENT op ':;Qr£s:pENsA'i:j:QVN. ::
THIS APPEAL (:i!:m;i~J:',:,»'£3Vz:~.;I'V%_jIr*'(ifi3"E?z_.A1j§21Iss1(}i~3 THIS
BAY. THES comm' 13;?,L':2%i::1?zE;.3:§ f3§5¥;ff§."¥5(}iQ§.,0WING:
Haaifi the parties finally on
the :iIV1<:'?.'i't;:':. awarded to the
by the ciainmrxt himself
in this 1'i1;?§;i:2l;§? on this mourzd that tha
L".'):§fi:n}i$si§1'1er in takizlg 816 1033 of <:a.mi:'1g
V {:%;3§pa_Civ?gfi'%é1t~Vf5'i;§9./'s. but in View of 1:136 medicai evidence
.t:;;U,éBcVcir gfipgliant referred ta the medica} fiVid€1"1Cfi on recerd.
C323 thfi ather hand, ieariled COi1I"i$6i far
the i'6Sp(}I3€i€"3Z1t Insurance: Q:m1pa1":}s' argued that the
c:0rrespc3m:1:ing percentage: merxffiened in the nzegli-{:31
evidence cf the Design' in respect of the "
concamed. Since there is I}(} finding rée.r;)rd§dL' as!
regards £033 of taarnirxg capacity aiiti
the Commissiorxer as wail. as tin: 'matexiaé . :evi°c1c:*1<iéA
also cioes not reveal as .:what of
carrying Capacity the
}Lf)0Ct0:' aiso Hut. that ht: has
assessed thsf; regard to
the less mentiorled in
$ct;e(:ii: l'é I-- _v fu;'t3;'}er in the ruling
refezfiéd ='C0i_lI'lSE21 for the respondent
thg !_&V1:2«€:XL4’i.*Zr}_1:Lj;’%;, fifiving stated that Wham there
‘ , wasi’ 13::;V. Eiasis f(;fi*:*éc01’diI1g 3. finding that thare was
E?) }’?>ExV::’iQSsVVV{:f §;~:aIz1i:1g capacity, such an {)r{i::*;r 5f the
Eiigh f’,i’;4:,§;_1vL’::’3′?;A§;::o2.1id net be up held, ;{ am of 1:116: View
that Z v.V_i”;£1is mattsr reqtflres remand Ea ‘(ha
Q’ C:-a1)5:znissi0:16r so as to assess thé 1835 of fiaming
u ..<frapaci'f€5: on the basis of t}1<"–: medical evidance keeping
if} View Expianation Ii ta Sesztian -4 cf the W.C.Ae': arid
fu:'the:1' the aviéierice Inns: alga 1% there to 111113 mu]:
V/$3?/'
3 .1'
the p0ssibi.13'.t§:' of 0131111311: b<=;:i3:1g not abie iii) do any
{)[h€I' work as well 3.33131": from being that of a driver.
For '($16, ajbxesaid reasans, the appe;3i»._4"'i§
disposed of with a direciian tie the {30mn1isS"i01-1§:r.: 1;1t»__.V _
reassess the kiss of earning Capacity A0"; u
thtfi above observations and pziss t11;({:fiv0t*ri_f:’ a
Cay Cxf this <31'der. V V
Both the ~ before tha
{§;an11:1issi0n¢r on 29.9; " " V
back to the Cemmissiener
f011;E1w"it,fi; ._ . %% . V
Sd/-
JUDGE
Ebvr: .. ”