IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED TI-IIS THE 13'' DAY OF DECEMBER. 2010 BEFORE THE I-ION'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.SREENIVASEGOWDA Miscelianeous First Appeal No. 789 of BETWEEN Sri Umesh S / 0. Late Narasappa Aged about 26 Years V Residing at New Binna1nanga1.a; Indiranagar 1st Stage,' Old Madras Road, " . Bangalore ~-- 560 038. ' 'O Appeliant J V _P ' Adv.) AND 1. ,---'..['lpf1e Manager, O ~ Banga1or"eVMetrvopo1itan Transport Corporation, K}! Road. O _ Bangarore -- 560 027. N'. . 4 Tlrlebisiiisional Manager, -. United India Insurance Co. Ltd., ~~No;,40, 1StF1oor, Lakshmi Complex, KR Road, Fort, ; Bangalore -- O2. Respondents
(By Sri. S. V. Hegde Muikhand, Adv. for R2,
R.1 — Served)
%/
This MFA is filed U/ S 173(1) of MV Act against the
Judgment and award dated: 10.04.2008 passed in MVC
No.4390/2007 on the file of VI Additional SCJ &
Member, MACT, Bangalore, SCCH–2, partly allowing the
claim petition for compensation and seeking
enhancement of compensation. ”
This appeal coming on for
the Court, delivered the following: ‘
I-Ieard. T he appeal is
consent of learned Counsei..a”V–r earin. ‘fo.r’*th’é. larties. it
is taken up for fina1″di_sposaI. ‘
2. For the sake of are referred to
as tiljiejf”areivierefefifred’to infthevlelaim petition before the
3. Briefhfacts~_oi’.th’e.’-ease are:
gffiiat on”0-505.2007, when the claimant was
the left side of l00ft. road near
all of a sudden a BMTC bus bearing
regis,trTation No.KA–01–F»2356 came in a rash and
if ‘wnegligent manner and dashed against the claimant, as
a result, he fell down and sustained grievous injuries.
H5’
Hence, he filed a claim petition before the IVLACT,
Bangalore, seeking compensation of Rs.4,O0V,.0_O0/~.
The Tribunal by impugned judgment and
awarded a total compensation of Rs.
after deducting 5% towards contributyory on
the part of the claimant has iawlarded
with interest at 7% p.a. Aggrieved by_l_tl1e? of V
compensation awarded byfthe: Tribunal the claimant is
in appeal seeking enhafic_eni_erlt o’f..eoi:;pensation.
4. As the’refis’ no-_ dispute regarding occurrence of
aeciderit, .negligenr:e”–a11d liability of the insurer of the
offending “point that remains for my
considerlation is:
the quantum of
A e”om”p.ensation awarded by the Tribunal is
proper or does it Call for
‘ enl:ian”e.ement?
Afterfi.-hearing the learned Counsel for the parties
and perusing the award of the Tribunal, I am of the
yievtf that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is
%
not just and proper, it is on the lower side and therefore
it is deserved to be enhanced.
6. As per wound certificate EX. P 3 the claimant has
sustained the following injuries:
1) Degloving injury on left elbow;
2} Corriminuted fracture to_th.e__1eft oe1box};%:’y ”
As per wound certificate Ex 5 the
sustained the following injur.i_es.:_
i] Degloving
ii} Bones exposed Lexposed
Injuries sustained by also evident from
discharge” with negative ex. P
10, OPD P__ IL ‘case sheet EX. P 12, Xmrays Ex. P
13._’:aind_supported’—by’oral evidence of the claimant and
as P.Ws.1 and 2 respectively. PW 2
whoeis an orthopaedic doctor assessed 78% disability to
efithe ‘land 26% to the Whole body.
‘p”‘:–A.c»’A(}’0I1sidering the nature of injuries, Rs.30,000/–
_’vawarded by the Tribunai towards pain and suffering is
on the lower side and it is deserved to be enhanced by
,%2,,
another sum of Rs.10,000/– and 1 award Rs.40,000/~
under this head.
8. The claimant has not produced any bills regarding
the amount spent by him towards treatment. Therefore
Rs.3,000/– awarded by the Tribunal
expenses is just and proper and.._it d.oes'”nfot for’ it
enhancement.
9. Claimant was treated_V:as__ inpatient in-L’
Bowring and Lady ;.Curzon—Hospital. ‘C’onAsiVd§ering the
same, Rs. 1 0, OOO / ~» lithe. ribunal towards
incid_yenta’_1don_* the lower side and it is
deservedlto be and I award Rs.20,000/–
this.’
.10. claims to be a painter and was earning
per.-:’day, but the same is not established. In
the absence of proof of income, the Tribunal assessing
his income at Rs.3,000/– per month and considering
period of treatment as 4 months, has rightly
lfllawarded Rs.12,000/– towards loss of income during
%
a total compensation of Rs.2,28,120/- as hagaisnt
Rs.1,72,00o/– awarded by the Tribunal _anid4«..»_l’afAter
deducting 5% towards contributory
part of the claimant he e_I1tit1edW
compensation 2, 1 6. 714/ – asz”-A ‘ * —
awarded by the Tribunal in.t_ereVsVt-.at:~–6%'”p:a. on’ V
the enhanced compensationlldof ‘F2si51?i,t3l’~’i/~¥§fi’om the
date of claim petition” of realisation
excluding invterest of 136 days in
ml-Hg the i ]; ‘
17. directed to deposit the
enhance? ainount with interest within
hNo:.–rnonthsw..iro1n the date of receipt of a copy of this
. interest for the delayed period of
the appeal.
18.24″ Qvuthvxof the enhanced compensation 75% with
proportionate interest is ordered to be invested in ED.
‘ nationalized or scheduled Bank in the name of
the claimant for a period of nine years renewable
one in three years with an option to withdraw interest
€42″
periodically and the remaining amount with
proportionate interest is ordered to be released in’
favour.
N0 order as to costs.
Vb/–