Area, Bangalore (SCCHQO), partly allowing t11e_..(;lajm
petition for compensation and seeking enhanoptzriitam-._Vof
conzpensabion.
This appea} coming on fo_r…h.,ea:r1__’ ‘ V
court delivered the foliowing :
J U D NT V
The afipeflant. ” 1) ‘ motor
accident leading to loss of
the left ear by him was
allowed awarding a sum of
called in Question by
him Inoroly on that under the head loss of
futufxe income’, ‘ the “amount given is on the lower side
. ‘V.t1:*§’Lc}; an error in taking the
Whole body at 4% when the medical
evit’ieI2oe’ fo the efiect that there is 31.6% of loss of
“of the left ear. Compensation was aioo sought
‘ €i:’1dor the head of loss of earning during the treatment
as wail as loss of amenities of life.
‘2. Learnod counsel Shri Gopalakxishna for the
apincliant, referring to the above mounds, contended
ls:
that the ‘I’ri¥3u1″1a1 committed an error in not nofieing the
medical evidence with regard to the pe1*eentage–ei’..ef
hearing of the left ear and there was
tak:ing it at 4% for the whole .
to the Ineeme Tax Returne filed
the submission made is thE£’5£.._fif1(3 iI1eez:I1e–ef
fell down after the ae<:1',§1eI;t«éizV:<.;lyV,_:,' ;fiVie;fefo1;e;"'d1eV§TIibunai
ought to have awarded lost by the
claimant VV
3. On eet.1nse1ShI’i Srishaila
for contended that
the eseessed the percentage of
disability ‘the A”wVfie1e body and moreover, the
V. – ieéengegedirx cargo transpori: business and, ae
enefl; 15:; hearing loss has not caused reduction
in –the _i11eeme and moreover, excepting the Income Tax
no other documents are produced by the
befexe the Tribuxaal to Show as ta how the
.»v.i:§1}uI*ies sustained by him had led to the ices of income
frem his business.
i?
J
4. Having heard both sides as above and after
carefuliy going through the material can
taking into account the nature of the
appellant, it is unlikely that the_11fi:a;ri.ng–‘iés’s.:::t§§:§§:4sione§i”‘ ” ‘V
to the left; car will lead to any
of the appellant from
Moreover, the leariizcgci c01.;n$£:f1LV._fG3:LA thé ” also
submitted that exce1V3f;”i{);” the accident, in
subsequent y€afi=?~.._ in the income
from the ‘
5. I am of the View
that tghfi increased undar the head
of ioss of ‘ z23;jt1«:r1f1Vi:i:f:§A¢;i”]:iu§Ee by awaréing a further sum of
éIid…..towards less of income during the
‘ 3 further sum of Rs.10,00{)/- can be
‘jfixfidcr the head of pain and sufiering, a
furt’m°*.1; o:fRs.10,0{}O/~ needs 1:0 be g’az1ted.
H Thus, the ccmwrzsation gets exlhanced by
‘ §§:s.50,000/- and the. interest, which is payable: on the
enhanced amount, will be at 6%. On the amount gven
%
by the Tflbuna}, the interest shali be finm the ( 1__ate of
{I36 ciaim petitian. The impugmd award is
modified by allowing the ailikéaj in Part thus? ‘
aka/’ %x % ‘ “*%%