High Court Karnataka High Court

The Managing Director vs Sri K Shivareddy on 18 September, 2008

Karnataka High Court
The Managing Director vs Sri K Shivareddy on 18 September, 2008
Author: Subhash B.Adi


\-\J|nl¥\l HID

rwmnmmw- ns-«an uvunf ,u,r nnmwmmaxn Hmm Luww U!” KANNI-HAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNA1’A!<A I-HGH CQLM

E3 'I.".E§E H.116'-H CEEURT OF KAREELTAEQ,

BE FEIERE

ms m1~:'EL1=; rm. :ms:s:::cE7.__ st;1=.:::Am_ 3.'f;;:§3:f-L.__

MFA ma. 12449< <35 2aV= ‘

….—up…–nu-…..-…z._

2 Tim unwmsme Dz.p.:§cmR;g , A
§£.¥§B.EE.TP££F~. STATE R0.FsI3″‘fFi.§r¥$PC’aRT”_.
czsaecamzrxzrm ” ~
3: H RflAD”B_A1r?GA’§.E;C¥I§§%.ie’2?.V _

RE? 22. *1’I-ififfi-IKE}? ‘3;AW._.-CEFICER
rmrrci’ c;L’;&:’.:§;=a:4 ,u:»’EE:::1«:s._. ‘
2: H F.c:An*~ Bsmeamam
“”” ….APPELZ£.AH’I’.’

5:: V’ ja T’.a..V_jT8A§:JEEv, anvomm 1

….–..m….-…._ Q—

2;, 5s:.’e_i” L13: 3’mv2mmm’

* T_§’m~v.;;;:.=:*aT_ Ismmpm mum!
, s~¢,a*.;EB«”‘_.=2:3e:3’i* 32 was
fl__E.¢’€3 .€:Iii3i?;seAR.Ez3I3z 951,35;

Kr3’I,A}?:. mm?

. .. RESPGKEEEET

M .

firs’. : ks? :’§G?AI.%I§E~n4’£;, RDVGCETE FQR CIR}

:32-‘arm ms TEE 18″‘ my GE’ sI::9*r31~mEI{“2i§%t:V:a. :.- *

‘fififi EEK FILES UKS 1.’?3{1§ SF M? ACT

‘~.. .mMz«:$’:’ “rm mmzmwr Am: A¥}A1’~’€.I} mmn:

i§.i.2€i{.’!’?’ PASSED 33$ EVE Hf}. 8′?55/213305 ON THE
E” 1332 35′ THE XIX A3131; . JTJDGE, CDURT OF J
631333 B §= Ifilfifilfi, }§E$T; 2’§ETB,CiPOI:ITIP£’I AREA;

E.3i£°¥&fiL€?-RE , {SCCH.1*~IC} . 1?} , AiiAR.fiII~fG

A

-. -vw-gr ‘I-or u\r\I\IIl”|IP1i’\I-U fllwfi LLJUKB SJ!” §{AKNA¥AK.A

2é§§.2E, who treatad him.

C{.’¥M’£*’:3’2=§Sh’:’I’ZQI~E {BF Rs. 1,45,. 913%.?/* WITH

512; 9.32; mm»: mm mm 912* PETITEOIJ TILL 1;:3£;1:=csS–1:*:.?.;’v..V

ms Km car-{me an ma .=sr:z1Iss§§i:2I~%’j=j*i’I{is f

man. tmem mtmr DELIVERED trim > §’0LLC%E*3fi{.. §’_f

J U D G M an A
This is an ”

fiazysration questi§niQg T§hé,_Jfidgmené and
Exam paeaesi in 2305 an

1a.a:.2as? _.f§y_ ; tpgj f¢;aims

Tribunal,

23, I suffered grievaus

injury :n[a :aaéfa¢:i§ent on 04.10.2005, an

amc:,;:.1.;%fé”;’tLA.mE’ tV;i1;Ve V§:a:é:Ez arm} nagligent driving of

“,_ggg bfié §é1§ngimg ta the Cbrporatian. In

fiuifi; iégafid; he made a ¢1aim of

F:.,s.§;f§%€3’V,éV$’i34§K- by way mi coxwansation. In
‘ s§yp$:iN$f his case, he got himself examined

and alaa gm’: exazninmi the Eoctcsxr

PK.2 ifinctaré in
hia eyiéencg &as stated that, he treated the

ciaimamt anfi ha is an Carthepedic Burgwn.

3; ya’

Be Ema aim stated that the claiman’t.VV_T»-flag

smstainefi griavcaus injuries an

right eyabraw, inj ury cure;,ga;=;Vl:;3$.L.v

fracture cf condyle
Thamfsm, there is
mi’ eibow and that over
m2.&r:.ranan right of
right. am. msjfiies is also
as: assessed the
fur;c?;i;:ms;i claimant to an
extent. 5: ‘ finV:1i;§;V”A:}:§;:r;é%%.%_§§g’;;:Mt:i.cu1ax iimh and 18%

ta: whala

Tribunal has taken 15%

may and inmm of the

Vgiaisffianfi-‘:’.”iV’s taken at R.s.3,.{3£’}G;’- gum.

V” §%;g,’g.f§1§§_’3¢’=:;r:.}_f’ i\AKNAiA!’U-I Hit?” i.UUK¥ U!” RA|<NAiAK.l-'-1 HEGH COURT 0? KARNATAKR HIGH COURT OF KARNAYAKA HIGH CQUR'

reasarnabie magensatien has been awarded.

.. …..ruur \.rI- -u-uuu-uru\a~ run.-an Luunz gr figmmggnmg g-fig"

Except the quantum. ma ether graund$, §re

azrgeafi .

:5: 2 do not fimri t};a:;1t;_ th;:*;2c'”¥e” :’_1’h..s5V””: V

error cmmmitted by the Tribunal in afieféiggj

tbs: cczmgsenaatisan. _

is dismissed. _ Wfa_=_ “–_NW W