High Court Karnataka High Court

The Managing Director Ksrtc vs Yogesh C on 11 November, 2010

Karnataka High Court
The Managing Director Ksrtc vs Yogesh C on 11 November, 2010
Author: Jawad Rahim
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF NOVEMBER

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR.IuSTICEWIAWAD~VRA:EI;M=.iii    

MFA No. 5325g2:oo7;fl~fI\I)_i'.j    7

BETWEEN:

THEJWANAGINGLHRECTOR g"

KSRTC Pa*--

BANGALORE ,' «>5 _=7»

REP. BY ITS CHIEF LAW..QEF1CER; I "
NwKRTC_,. ;I;sgx, »

HUBLI I~"",f=~; 'RFVRi%'x4'3' ".APPELLANT

(BY SMT. SuMAIRNGAIAIAAV.L:SwAMY, ADV.)

AND :

YQGESH    _
S/'O'.~-CHANORA.SHEKAR BTS.
24-¥E.ARS_ , _  M

R/O.' IjEM.SAG'A.RL: VI_L_LAGE

 SAGAR~.TALI.UK' I  
1 _'SHIMOGADISTRICTI'  RESPONDENT

I.7:;.IA._RA-.D(YOOE'SIji'i--C. - RESPONDENT IS SERVED)

  '""THISr'.-'MFA FILED U/S. 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST

v.A'.V~4"_~THER.73UDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: S/8/2006 PASSED IN

FIVC. 63/2001 ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE

 MEMBER, ADDL. MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS
"=._"~T_RIBUNAL, SAGAR, AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF

.5'
g *''L/

 



Rs.40,300/-- WITH INTERESTZAT 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE

OF PETITION TILL REALISATION.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: -.

ORDER

KSRTC is in appeal against the judg_rn_eV:”ri-t_an_d~ avlvardg

in MVC.63/2001 on the file of A:dd«l.iiVioto.r.:

Claims Tribunal, Sagar _.datedfl:O5.O8.g2,Ci0’6′.9′

respondent/cla§mant has rernSaiV:n’ed unrepresentfled despite
service of notice of th.i§’agppea’i”.I. ‘;S’:’ I

‘– ‘ is admitted and taken up

for final d”:sposalV}’ ” .

..ifromAthmeAmateria| made available, it is noticed

thati’th:e,:r’eVsp.oSndent/claimant sought compensation from

the!apvp~e!laintIS alleging that on 19.07.1999 at 11.40 am.

vvhilezhei’ was standing in the corridor near Sriram Bakery,

first respondent drove KSRTC bus bearing Reg.No.KA–

.,,__3§1/F-220 in a rash and negligent manner, He lost control

consequent to which Bus reversed and he collided with hit

1/

cu
A3»

him. The appellant fell down suffering injuries and was
rushed to hospital where he was examined by i_”–_’W2 —

Dr.K.N.Ra}’shekharappa. He was inpatient for”~.5g_,”d-.a_ys

during which he was subjected to

Fortunately, it revealed he had__n.ot__ suffered::.’.fractu’re

bones of the body but had

Dr.K.i\i.Rajshekhar, Senior ‘Sp’e.cia|istv-

deposed claimant had suffere__dminjury tohlthejfiipgijoint and

movements are pain’iuV:l and The limb was
externally rotated and.’t’he-re: w’a.$”‘sten’derini’ess over the right
trochantric,.re.gio:n’::._«_’_A~b_io_o1d_clot iwaslifolund below the right

ribs and he onl 26.07.1999.

, .4. summary, wound certificate and

documents._brough’t”Vin evidence are considered. The

4’iVopi_i.aed though there was no fracture yet the

ilnjury head caused 20% physical disability of the

whole body. The tribunal accepting the evidence of PW2

V”‘x.,Aawwa:”r’ded Rs.10,000/- towards pain and sufferings,

_gV___F?;s.10,O00/– towards loss of happiness, amenities and loss

of academic year in education, medical expenses

Rs.15,000/-, traveiling expenses Rs.2,800/–, nursing and

attendant charges Rs.40,300/–. These amoijnts4.:T:”are

questioned. However as could be seen from.«_ti1eV nati.jref’_Cf

injuries, the physicai disabiiity spoi<en_to tried

award is on the iower side. The;"1«conte'i*itio'r*;–

KSRTC that award is excessive-'~…iVs therefore :u:ns.sjstaVinjabie."' V

I do not find any ground in tihenavppeai to jursvtifyfteduction
of compensation granted to 'the?Vresipoincietnt/ciaimant, The
appeal is therefore disniissed aff.i:rnjain'-g judmgnent and

award passeci»soyiiii§;"hg_=. H a

d.e'po'sit_is. Vpermitted to be transmitted

to the ifritaunai'fo.r'vd'isbursen*ient. . v
sal-

‘JUDGE

vg/'”—— i