313. 'EN. H_o::::i«1p};>a§
_ figs: Maj.:3r.;g_
1 MFA F795/O6
IN mg HEGH COURT 0? KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE f
DATED THIS ON THE 30% DAY OF MAY 21_: H if if 'V'
PRES EN'?
THE: HONBLE: MR. JUSTICE K.Lv:».:4:x@ég:w%i§'N2'5F1% *«
AND ' '
THE HQNBLE MR. KEMPANNA Vfg
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST Ai5>§f::AL%-5x?i3;§179'§T:*fs 2006 {MV}
Sri. Ranganatfh 5 _ _ -. .
8/0. 811 Venkatasw;::nj,.g V.
Age: 47' years; A' *1' "
R/0. 31"" Cross, E'~'h(}'\-"i,_C/Q1C¥f1_'}'?",_ "
Tharikare ' ' , _ '
ChikkamagaloreDistrict APPELLANT
Sri.V_":§5URE:SIj£ M Lgmg , Adm
AND' "
.
_S,/0, Sri N__a.:°a:~:ég’0w&a,
q Busiraess,
‘ _ ~R”,f’s. N-c::g.’?94, 11*} Crosg,
‘ ,’~AE5;.s:;~§f Chard RG36,
‘RR/\’v’
,\\_\ -x<.¢.«.'.. ….v' N u '. <»\.u,»…v,m,-… " ,
¢¢«§« \ 5,, \\ x ., . §Z~'}"/~\K'.\, <§.'~"'\ J' 'z:~ '~'~ '.s.~.\', 4 (1.; Aw .{6x",o: *'\';;~ '~'2'\.~*\"lcewx:,§$":'x<;&»%§;'§w
2 1x4F,é;~1-?9eg§é' _.__ A'
Mahalaxrnipura,
Bangaiore 580 886.
2. The Regional Manager,
United India Insurance Co. Lid,
N325, Shar:1iara:1arayana Builéingg ‘ ” V;
M.(3.Read. Bangalore 550 001. ” ‘Resem:D}:N*:’e’
(By Sri. KN. Srinivasa fer Adv.) «H
This MFA filed’ u/S ;f.?%3{V1V) Yer; “agains{ the
judgment and award: ‘ dated: V1 2i’,f§G94/”2VC–Q5′ paesed in MVCZ
No,4e94/2004 on %_:he:;1ifi’£e ¢£’1tf:¢”‘2qX .Aaa:.&:.; & Member,
MACT, Metropogiifaffr,Ezfeg, “-.E.gf1gaii)fe.; .,.{SCCH~17), partly
allowing the e1ai:31″»-;r>e:itiQ’:i rfdr.’ eoffipeglsation and seeking
enhancement ‘éfC0(1%f§:)€fi§iiiZiQ.fi~.. V V
This for Hearing, this day,
IVIANJUNATH .g L, eziehveré-:warcj:s”_eA§er*Seriai”~.
medical expenses and attendant
future loss of income Rs.§i,{}_QO/ 53:’ eeerning
during period ef treatment. ~« has been
awarded’ Being n::>t_ eresent appeal
is filed seeking _ V _ A _
3. We parties. The main
contention o_:f us fiséhat the Tribunal is not
justified in “‘e<3Inpe:1sation. Therefore, he
requests i;he_CLuLef’ r’eeeneide} the entire evidence and award
}’:::’::’ei”:2.I1&d e’e;r:pexr’V1AsV:i*L’i’é)§1 to the claimant. The counsel fer
the”i§1S;$’;*i3ineVe._ Ceineegny has supported the judgment and
‘ VV L’>….e.ward ef’_i§:e T::be§.3_:a:1;
Hai2’i::::g hearei the eeunsel for the partiea the enly
«. “pe£::2i ‘§3eA”eeneidere:i in this appeai :5:
5”?’
5 MFA 1795,5336
‘ 5
has no’: been awarcied compensation under the head 1<::ss,_o,
amenities in fife. Under {his heading, we would iike to V
sum of R$.28,G{}O/~ eoneidering ihe age and 21voe.a_1;;_on,.. T
in 331, the elaimani is etititled to ihe 'eo:.n'p_er:Sa:::onV,_o§
Rs.L18,0{30/~ as against the eomper1sa4i.iooV.a\,varde_dA b;5'
Tribunal in a sum of Rs.82,000/~.
27. In the eireumStanee«§:”appeai._ie é133?Wed in part.
The appellant is entitled for aAs.m%f::-oieis enhanced
eompensaiion 6% Viiozeaciate of petition
tifl the date of Vefiheigeed Compensation, a
sum of interest shall be
invested in ‘die oarfie for a period of five years
in any nationaiiseei ‘gang’.-« He “entitled to draw the periodical
i:if:e’r1e$t. egifiouni with proportionate interest
shall re’1ea’Se_r;i to claimant.
Se/w
323333
See/»e
Eeege