EN ‘THE; HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED TRIS THE 2?” DAY OF NOVEMBER 2008
BEFORE
THE HONBLE MR.JUS’l”iCE SUBHASH B.AI3%.i:” T
Sri. P. Narasimappa,
S/0. Venkataramanappa,
Aged about 45 years,
R/at. 4333 {31v§m,
Channakeshavanagar,
Hosur Road, ._
Banga1ore–100. _ ‘ “;’.»_;’§PP£§LLAN’I’
(By Mrs. x
I. TheMa:uagcr_ , _
Oricnta;H,ns*a1z*a::1ce Vbtd}, * ‘
Regional om»: % _ ‘
No.44/45, Eesici;-ncy }?¢pe1d&.(,i’;*oss,
[co Snapping Cqmiaigtx, ‘
Bax1ga.1o:*e>2$.
2. Thf:
Maia Math,
Ne.
Be1i.:§1:1dur_PO$i.’T
_ Bangalore-3’T;”V
2 ~ .. RESPGNDENTS
Venkatesh. Adv. for R1
ijispensed With)
Misc. First Appeal is filed under Section 173(1) of
against the judgment and award cit. €)6.{)2.20(}’? passed.
gt; MVC No.-4150/2006 on £11: file of the IV Addl Judge, Court of
Small Causes, Member, MACT, Metropolitan Area, Bangalore,
3. Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant
submitted that. claimant is a driver and his leg is amputated
below knee, new he has become unfit to drive the motor_
and for him it is 108% ciisabilig-,r_ She also .
claimaxit was earning more than Rs.4,000[;;-§_ batri.” the ii ” ‘V ‘V
Tribunal has taken only Rs.3,000j- as int;
Further submitted that, on the head»iOf__paiIi’£it_1§ii oi’
amenities and other incidental chargeé; is
on the lower side and not
considered flue evidencepn ii ii i
4. for the
insurance Compaiiy doctor has stated
that. there has not stated as to
Whtfithfli’ it ‘fiiétgiricitgr. He has assessed 40%
disabifity iiihc Tribunal has taken the said
of “”” calculated the amount of
conipsgfigaficzi:”t9}}v:iid$’_:1oss of future income. He submitted that,
Vozi othei*’}3éad$,_ .1€t§ié:~:c;nab1e compensation is awarded.
that the claimant has suifezmd amputafion of left
is not in dispute and is evident fwm discharge
V and also from the evidancez «sf Pw–2. It has also come in
fevidence that, the claimant is a dzivcr and amputation
nermaliy veouixi make a person invalidate to carry on unskilled
work. Ne doubt. he can get an artificial leg. but it cannet be
that. such artificial ieg wouid help him in the matter of A’
unfsess the vehicle is a special vehicle manuflacmred ~
Driver in nemnai vehicle has to use his legiand ‘is glee to
operate the vehicle, he has to have pmgier ;$ene.afie;n’~
reaction both in hand and 1egs’and Witj1 this. {Vii-3ab11jf’3’r;ei.*e:»*.1:;etJ:’iervM
the Meter Vehicle Authoxity would gmeeé T_ 1%”: finfi with
artificial leg also he cannot _ Doetor has
assessed the disability at no disturb the
said finding. ‘V the injury of
amputation, to be awarded
on all heads.
6. The é awarded compensation of
R$,30,00Q,I§:. utowardsV” and suffering. In my opmion, for
afipufaiéon, be 1653 than Rs.1,0(},OO0l–. Rs.1,0(),()G0/-
L» is and suffering. As regards to the medical
a of :93; 18.4421» is awarded. It need not be said that,
‘ giospitai is a Government Hospital, however, apart
there would be incidental charges. which requixes
The claimant was inpatient for 40 days, during
pexiod and substantially, the claimant must have spent.
Accordingly, thesame is enhanced to Rs.20,00{}] -. The income of
I’
vxé
-. Since there is amputation, there is
“‘1jc:V;11ireme;ii pf limb, which may cost more; Rs.5D,€)00/–
artificial iimb. Towards attendant and
charges, Rs.25,0G{)/- gs graxzxteal. In all, the
VT , _ is enfitled far compensation of Rs.5,52.800/ – as against
the claimant is taken at Rs.3.0()0/-. accident is during 2006; in
2006, for a driver the income could not have been less than
Rs.4,5()() ,1 -. Even if it is more, but there is no ezvidcnce, but safely
the income of the driver could be takfin. at
Admittedly. the claimant was inpatient for 40 days and _
amputation, he could not have become medically
after 40 days, considerable time might iv
At least, in my opinion, it must bc;3_i§’; for ‘
laid-up mnoci’ , the compensation {he of
Rs.4.5{}O/– 1.3.. Rs.27.000j-.v ‘ ‘As we 1.533% :51’ futun:
income is concerned, even claimant is
entitled for income. As far
as amenities are lost his left icg below
knee and it :is” amenities in life is
concerned, domfort; waiicing, squatting,
sitting, fast e1.11VV’11i_$t::é§j§¥%,§;;;’ments are concerned. they have
“W’it11____¢t3»m::sc deficiencies, he has to ‘live
‘life society. Towaxds loss 0f amenities, it is
r”~–:aw
Rs.?.,71,642/– awaxfied by the Tribunal with 6% interest per
ammxn on the enhanced amount from the date of petition
payment,
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in
KNB/Il-