High Court Karnataka High Court

United India Insurance Co Ltd vs Rajashekar on 3 March, 2010

Karnataka High Court
United India Insurance Co Ltd vs Rajashekar on 3 March, 2010
Author: K.Sreedhar Rao Gowda
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALQRE
DATED THIS THE 3" DAY OF MARCH, 201Aejj[_i~~.__

PRESENT

THE i-|ON'BLE MR. JUSTICE.K..SREE--b'H'AT§*.'nA'ofg,  

AND 
THE HON'BLE MR. 3uST1CiEA_.NJENQAGQPALASTSQVWDAA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST Ai3§ii§>V'E.A_i.--.I\_ViO.7.'15é3:/v.2O£)V}i:1 (MV)
MISCELLANEOUS ETRST A_r_>3EALTSNo,'7o64/2004 (Mv)

M.i=.A.No.7158/2004  '

United In_d'ia IraSu'ra'nCe*C_.d'.' 'Ltd.,
Ganganagar Bran-ch;..Ban'gaIore.
Thrpugih its R.eg'i'oriaI Office,

#V2'5, S_hankaraha.rayana Buildings,

 .M."G.R"oiad," Bangalore -~ 560 001.
 ' ,R'ep.. b.y'itS-D"eputy Manager
 Sri. 'P.TS:.'~CVhh,uas'a. :APPELLANT

ray"SriV_i3.'C,S'eetharama Rao, Adv.)

 AND:

 TS:ri§f;Rajashekar,
'¥.Ag'e'<:i about 45 years,

S/o. C.Subbaraju,

E ' '"'R/a 'Praveena Chandra Niiaya',

Premnagar Extension, Sonna Shettyhalii,
Chintamani Town.

:RESPONDENT

(By Sri B.R.\/ishwariath, Adv.)

_V

M.F.A.No.7064/2004

BETWEEN:

Rajashekar,

Aged about 45 years,

S/o. C.Subbaraju, _

R/a ‘Praveena Chandra Ni£a’ya”;-…

Premnagar Extension,
Chintamani Taluk. _ “‘–…Ae:APPELLANT

(By Sri B.R.VishwanatAh_’°8; _Sr~;_t R;aVrna~-._[s1_eh.a_n, Advs.)
AND: T * ” ”

1. H.R.Ramana«th’–Set:ty,major,
Son of .R’a’n.gav Shetty, [2 ‘
R.G.C.=7 Road Line, B’ae’E.aji”CQmp,eix,
Suitanp’et,* 1l;___ 3 V ~
Ba”ng’ai’or.ef.- 5360 0S~3_;*

2. sha.ya]@ shrvasha«r’ana’p_pa,
Major, Son of r~a;’ya’r.«–nLa;’
Kaggad-asapur-a, ‘ *
_.’\i0.:, C.V;-Riarnan Nagar,

“Ban_LgalVvore -“”S6.Q..£’;93.

‘ –VB.A.v,Rajah’Reddy,

iY3aj.ofi=,vVSo.tn.<)f D.G.Annaiah Reddy,
. "{\Io.64i;_71/D Main,
'*-4…Om__i'ar-Layout,
Bangaiore.

V’ A4.h”<The Branch Manager,

The United India Insurance Co. i_td.,
N0.108/7, Bazar Street,
5"' Main Road,
Ganganagar,

Bangafore.

:RESPONDENTS

MFA l\io.7158/2004 is filed under Section 173(1) of
MV Act against the Judgment and Award dated 14.06;-2,004
passed in MVC i\lo.602/97 on the file of the II Addl;«i_,_D~ist.
and Sessions Judge, MACT–III, Bangalore RL.l.ral’_»D’_ist~riCt.,

Bangalore, awarding compensation of Rs.4,_2’=i« 267/9–iwith
interest at 6% p.a. from the date petitiori till. re_1’a!isatio–«n__

and directing the appellant hereinto d_epo_sit ‘t’h’efsar’ne.i.V

MFA No.7064/2004 is fi|ed:”:.unt’lAer*’;Section” 1″73′(–1,j*?ojf

MV Act against the Judgment _and Award date’i;l. ,1’4.”O6′:.2(J0-42
passed in MVC i\io.602/97 ‘on’*t.he file ofthe,II’¢Ad»d.l.–‘ Dist.=U

and Sessions Judge, MACT-I’I»I,”l»Banga’lo_reARural District,
Bangalore, seeking en;_hancem.entv.of’wcompe’nsatio.n.

These appeals “~cxo’mir’la_g igovn””v–for,:”‘h,,ea ring this day,
SREEDHAR RAO J., delivered ‘the?fo_.l-l.9w.i.ng

H’ i,:V’=iuDGMENT

the reas{on_s’st:ated in the applications, both Misc.

Civil. Nos.hi115105/o9’ii&”1’i406/99 are allowed. The order

i.30.0’§.2OCiS”‘is”recalled and appeal is restored to file.

the appeals arise out of the same

aicc:iden.tid_”BTi’he petitioners have filed one appeal seeking

enhaiaqément and the insurer has filed an appeal

ch_a’ll’enging the order regarding payment of interest from

___the date of petition.

4/

3. The appellant / petitioner sustained’..gtri.e’vous

injuries resulting in amputation of right hand.

disability of the limb is assessed at>V1OO°/e;””Thie,’~

disability is assessed at 50%. ap’piel3ia4rit_1is.’said’

lorry owner and a booki’ng«–.._Vageriti’ VBec’ai.ise__o_f

disability, he may not be effectiyellylvfifunotion as a
booking agent. His inA’c.o:i’n_e Rs.4,000/~ p.m.
Income loss ‘:Rs.2,000/~ pm.
The total of disability
would be m Rs.3,36,000/-. The
appellalnteis for pain and agony,

Rs.j_.,00,00(.3/’~ foriosls of amenities and future discomfort.

ivieldicalll:bilils,_,are produced for Rs.2,00,000/- and odd. The

isifigranted Rs.2,20,000/- for medical and

inci–.derital-expenses, Rs.24,000/~ for loss of income during

laid up period. In all, appellant is granted Rs.”7,30,000/~

T “~,_irv’i*th interest at 6% pa as against: Rs.4,24,267/- awarded

” the Tribunal.

4. In the instant case, the owner and insurer of

the iorry in question have been impleaded beia”t’eVd’i-yf”after

about 4 years. In that view, the insurer

question shail pay the compens;3’t”iori*«wit’h a-t:6i’% ‘

p.a. from the date of impieadment__oi’=_insureifhli.

The entire compensation sha’i£1bwe payable’v.to’_:th’ewa;5oeliantV

in MFA 7054/04xmmheupproyenmir6raepo§&;~we
Accordingly, both 7158/04 are

disposed of.

Sd/%
Jufiqg

_____

Ind E