{N THE HIGH COURT OF' KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE am DAY OF SEPTEMBER. 2010
BEFORE T'
THE HON' BLE MR. JUSTICE B.sREENIvAs:Ef ieoiwiriizx *
Miscellaneous First Appeal 1\Io';' 1-964}; K 2
Between
Srldhara
S / O. Ningappa
Age 7 years V '_
Minor represented » _ -. g
by hls next fnend natura} " *
father Ningappa, .
S/0. Bh1ma,ppa':'. I _.
Major, _. _ '
R/O. Ma11apur"Vi.i1agej;.__ V _
Sh1kar1pu.r"I'_ai_uk, ' ._ D
Sh1m0ga.,D'1stri'et;. _
. Appellant
[By smf Lokesh -MAa_1av..all1, Adv.)
.....
‘ E e1%.- _ Dsha”mLiu–11a,
” “S? Mehaxnmed Ibrahim Sab,
Ag’e~:’i__38 years,
V-R’/’0;”M. S. Kevi Shikaripur,
~~ D_tst..Sh1mega.
, The Branch Manager,
United India Insurance Co. Lt:d.,
J .C. Road, Sagar,
D1st. Shlmoga.
Respondents
(By Sri. P B Raju, Adv. for R2,
notice to R. 1 is dispensed with)
This MFA is filed U/S 173(1) of MVAct agaiiistittme
judgment and award dated: 13.10.2008 passed in.
No. 2831/2006 on the file of District J.d_dge;v.’.1’i—..}<'a.st,
Track Court, Shimoga, partly allowing the 'clainjipetition '
for compensation and seeking e11"h'a.*1teer1"1~erit of" . _
compensation.
This appeal comingon ‘Admiss’iQn’,’v
the Court, delivered the fc-‘Ii0vv.1ng: g V
This appealv seeking
enhanceinentf pf by the
Tribunal, ‘ it
2. is admitted and with the
conseritpfi1earne’d:’Ce’i;znseI appearing for the parties, it
is up forgtfinalvidisposal.
_ of the case are:
on 07.03.2002 when the claimant
was”.tr’aveI1ing in the bus bearing registration No.
1691 from Shikaripura to his village Maliapura
after getting down from the bus, when he was
moving, the driver of the bus suddenly moved the bus
%.
as a result front wheel of the bus was ran over the left
foot of the claimant and he sustained grievous i.nj_uries.
Hence, he flied a claim petition before
seeking compensation of Rs.2,80,00(}«”/¥}
Tribunal has awarded, compensaitiori of ‘,–59:’1*/~’f
with interest at 6% pa. I
4. As there is no ihvoccigrrence of
accident, neg1igenee._”anc1’i\’/i{a.bi’iit§:_5f.the of the
offending vehicle remains for
…. c0inp_ehsation awarded by
_ the Tribnxiai is just and reasonable-or does it
_ caii for
5.V_ u learned Counsel appearing for
parties andp-cr’using the judgment and award of the
V of the View that the compensation
“a1ward.eci: the Tribunal is not just and reasonable, it
is on__ihe lower side and therefore it is deserved to be
, enhanced.
6. The claimant has sustained injuries to left foot
and bone distortion was there. Injury sustainedhy him
is evident from wound certificate Ex P 6, disc1’1a1*§e–Vse’ard
of c.o. Hospital, Ex. P 10, Photos EX. 1:>~..i1_::2
Negatives EX. P 13a and supp’orted.h}:t’ 2 j
the claimant examined as hassnot
the doctor regarding dis’ahiiity. 2. He.’ ‘wasVVu”treat’ed as
inpatient at Me. S:§I1i.moga Vfrom 7.32002
to 23.3.2002 and he treatment at
Davangere; ‘l’h;eir’e isflno fr~acture}’ 2 .. A
7. ,tsCo1is:EIe}-mg :nej%11’a:ii;eit of injuries Rs.30,000/–
awaj:de’d’ towards pain and suffering is
just and«–.}sroper_ai1._d it”..’does not call for enhancement.
it awarded by the Tribunal towards
flieidioalvsiv expenses is based on the medical bilis
fsrod–‘;’i(‘:e.d” by the Claimant, there is no scope for
as enhancement under this head.
9. Claimant was inpatient in MC. Gann Hospital,
Shimoga and Davangere for 39 days. Considering the
$5
sarne Rs.10,000/~» is awarded towards incidental
expenses such as conveyance, nourish:neI1t__ and
attendant charges is on the lower is
deserved to be enhanced by another
and 1 award Rs. 15,000/- unde:rMthi’she–ad..«
10. Claimant is an young
he was looked after by
period leaving their just and
proper to award of income of
parent during«p..treatiTnentiperio’d1_Wd:§ award the same.
11. The not examined the doctor
regardingtpdidsaiéiiity:i=ie”is’ not entitled for compensation
towards loss.’ of ‘amenities and future Ioss of income.
– _ thevmciaimant is entitled for the foilowing
A V ..con1pensa_ti.on:
_*i)_ Pain and suffering Rs. 30,000.00
.. 0′ 2) Medical expenses Rs. 1,590.68
Incidental expenses Rs. 15,000.00
4) Loss of income of parent
During laid up period Rs. 5,000.00
Total Rs.51,590.68
Rounded off to Rs.51.591/-
%,.
13. Accordingly the appeal is allowed in part. The
judgment and award of the Tribunal is modifiedto the
extend stated hereinabove. The claimant is
a total compensation of Rs.51,591/41″
Rs.41,591/ ~ awarded by the :’Ti*ib”unéaI’..’ inte’1*-esthat T T.
6% pa on the enhanced comiiliiensationdtfi
from the date of c1ann’–».__§etit ion’ “date of
realisation.
14. The to deposit the
enhanced :interest within two
months of of a copy of this
judgmeiitiand ‘the to be invested in F.D.
in the namedh the c1af.rnan’t in any nationalised or
” foi9’a period of 12 years renewable once
No order to cost.
J