IN T243 HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKAAV...'-. CIRCUIT BENCH A'? DHARWAD V' " DATED THIS mg 25TH DAY BEFQRE % V son' BLE MR. MISCELLANEOUS r«'1LR$ APEA§§;g;g091é§ (MVC) THE DIVISIONAI,*'£3QNTR'OL&R_ " BELLARY, PRESF;N'_I*LY REPRESENT--ED..¥3.Y THE CHIEF LAW C;'I?_FICER, *3'_\Ifs'}K_I€I_'C , CENTRAL APPELLANT (BY SRI. }§A'§'-I :V Haégmml, Al)V.,) AND . ' V ', , '1' M ;éA1wA'r2aAM_MA * _W/v§)"}3I:I«EEMALING:'~§£3&H SWAMY 4-QYEARS, A€3».RICULTURiS'}' R10-A .x«;c::v:,Lmi 'mass 1::-5S*£f,_ BESLLARY RESPONDENT
TI5£i3VLA,;-MSPEAL is FILED ws 173(1) 01? MV ACT
AGAIi’-1ST,THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 30.4.2003
“IN MVC 150.67/2007 CON THE FILE OF THE
‘ MACTJII, BELLARY, AWARDiNG A
” CQMPENSATION OF’ RS.86,000/- WITH INTERESF @ 6%
PEA. FROM THE DATE OF THE PETITION TILL THE DATE
M Oi’? DEPOSIT.
THIS M.F.A. COMING ON F012 C)RI)ERSé,..’£’.E i’_IV’S _”o:”V;~ ~
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOW1N(}:’– _
JUDGMEN1}… 2 4
This appeal is filed by .’
questioning the judg:}:1eI3t”Ve’aV;f1£1V_ tho
Tribunal, both on ao§iona h;oV:A’ vv.=a.sJ§\vei1 as
quantum. The Iearnod having
regard to th€i. &’1’2;£it11j:[“‘(V5.’ L by the
C1aim3I’1t/ ._2g’9faifi{§e€1″”‘VVcompcnsation of
Rs.86,G00,’.}:AV.§aii{lfE+% mtem.oooo
2. S learned counsel
= for ififie’v—–{3o1’poration/ appellant submits that
as determined by the Tribunal is
e; :<:o'ésiV¢-. ' further submits that the evidence on
' record" ,(f<;os not Show that the accident has occurred
' "ii the Ixegligence of the bus of the corporation.
%
3. I have pemseci the judgment
passed by the Tribunal. Apparently, the
proceeding towards her land .-2§:t””‘aLi)o1.;t”.:’
1.9.2006. At that time the
corporation came from at in
negligent manner ~1;§1e The
claimant was shifted and she
has taken a period of ten
days. V’fo3r’Rs.5,O0,000/~ under
vaxiolie headVVs.’–“.VpTeari§1enee oxi record would disclose
that indeed occurred due to the rash
and4_§i§§.eg1igentV”d~zVfi§§ing:of the driver of the bus. The said
V. on the oral evidence of the claimant,
Jihe documentary evidence at Exs. P.1 to
g fhe finding which is based on appreciation of
V’ c.eviae,;;c¢ cannot be faulted.
4. In so far as the compensation awarded is
concerned, it is to be noticed that the fl
to — with appropriate multiplier. But
claimant/respondent has suffered an injury
arm and there are commjnuted frastures, H of .,
injuries are fracture of radius afid
regard to the nature of injuzies the of
the Tribunal has awarded a of /
“Pain and suffering” a torwanzis
“Medical expfinees”. of the
Tribunal hi5¢1S'”§f’ V’ix”1oome of the
month and has
taken at 5 % and has
of earning capacity” on
the gauge of eisabintjr. Indeed Mr. Hosamani, is right
. is an error oaleula in as much
income at Rs.3,000/– would work out
?
L that by itself cannot be said that total
V of Rs.86,000/– is unreasonable. Indeed,
” @.it…e§is to” be noticed that for two fractures the
” “eompensatioza awarded under the heading of “Pain and
suffering” is slightly on the lower side. it
noticed that the Tribunal has not –.
towards loss of amenities. Haviog
of injuries, the duration Vof¢__.hospi}iaii.safioi’; em f e
medical expenses, I am of ifihe total
compensation of to be
unjust or on the I do not
find any V’ appeal stands
dismisserii ciismissed on merits,
questiéiil of to.’ the respondent on delay
would for stay also stands
rejeeied. so .
._ in deposit shall be transmitted
V i . to eeiicefned Tribunal.
sd/is
Iuciqé
A ems.