IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2010
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.SREENIVAS_E --E(';°rOWADA
Miscellaneous First Appeal No. 2177 4'
BETWEEN O
Vishwanatha.
S / 0. Venkappa Acharya,_r .4
Aged about 48 years,
At Nandadeepa Compound; ' _
Anandarao Road, Amba}pady;L~--. "
Udupi Tajiuk and Di_s'i:'ictA_. . " '
...Appe11aI1t
[By_VS:ri.A Jof <3: C0., Acivs.]
1.
JaV_ed.V A = V
_ _ S / of 1,33:-.Bashiéf .
«A Age: 26~–.years,
‘ om K,K. House, Kuche Kad,
V ._PaI1iyu_1_”,
‘ .v.:U_di:pi.fI7a}uk and District.
v_ ibrafhim,
.. ‘S/0. Late Umrahba Haji.
‘Aged about 42 years.
A1: Safia Manjil.
Uchila Bada,
Udupi Taluk and District.
13%:
3. The Nationai Insurance Co. Ltd.,
Shankar Building,
Opp. Masjid,
Masjid Road,
Udupi Taluk And District.
By its Branch Manager.
Respo”;r2.d’ents
(By Sri. Lex Plexus, Adv. for R3,
R. 1, R2 — Served) ”
This MFA is filed U/ S 1’4;r'{5(1}”‘ef:’i\/’iv .’Act”agajns’t::;the dd
Judgment and award dated: 1;2_009 passed i:1″MVC
No. 1441/2007 on theiiiie of the Addl; v..1civ11 «Judge»
(Sr.Dn) and Add}. MACT;”e«sUd.upi,”p_art1},i= allowing the
claim petition for cQ_:Iipensati0n”«__and§ seeking
enhancement of c0fi1pensatiQir1t.___ ‘A ‘A
This appeal co1ningi’.”dnV ft’)Z’:iv.’z’A’-A\i.:(v_:’1:I»»_I_i.ViSSiO11, this day,
the Court, deiiiveredflie *
id”fi§naMENT
the claimant for enhancement of
cQm,pens’ati_don..awarded by the Tribunal.
:,,p–.;»1e”a:’d. HThe”Vappea1 is admitted and with the
Counsel appearing for the parties, it
is for final disposai.
@
3. For the sake of convenience parties are referred to
as they are referred to in the claim petition before the
Tribunal.
4. Brief facts of the case are:
That on 28-10-07, “was ll
proceeding as a pillion .rid.er on-,_ rnotor”‘cycl.eWbeari11g*
registration No.KA– towards
Brahmagiri, near a Santro car
bearing registration.No..- came in a rash
and negligent their motor
fell down and sustained
injuries.’ “a claim petition before the
MACT. ‘Udupilil compensation of Rs.5,00,000/~–.
lfifribvunal*byj___in1pugned judgment and award has
‘ Vlawardedlieompensation of -Rs.62,710/ — with interest at
p.a’..V-l;f\ggr1eved by the quantum of compensation
aurardcidhlby the Tribunal the claimant is In appeal
* vseeking enhancement of compensation.
As there is no dispute regarding occurrence of
accident, negligence and liability of the insurer of the
offending vehicle, the only point that remains for my
consideration in the appeal is:
Whether the quanturr1_.i..__” . for; 3
compensation awarded by the Trib.u__nal’* ‘
just and proper or does it Call vffor
enhancement? ”
6. After hearing the learned’.C:oiiAnsel.’if{‘ir’ then
and perusing the award fthe ‘l’ri-b_t1nal_:, of the
View that the cornpenxsatiotnll aiirarded by the””l”ribunal is
not just and proper. ‘the and therefore
it is deserV!*3t;i”tVl.’be €'<_nhaneed.p"' 2
7. _ the following injuries:
of right leg.
by him are evident from the
eertifiieatew’EX.P.4, medical certificate — EX.P.7,
‘ summary — Ex.P.8, treatment certificate »-
1_l;V’Vie:disability Certificate — Ex.P.I2 and supported
by evidence of the claimant examined as P.W.l.
‘ll-V Doi;.tor is not examined regarding disability.
65
Claimant was treated as inpatient for 5 days at High
Tech Medicare Hospital, Udupi, where he was operated
with fixation of implants and discharged with advice
to continue follow up treatment.
8. Considering the nature of
awarded by the Tribunal towards”pa_in andV::stf.ffe1€i.ng”‘.isiT. it
on the lower side and it is to erihancedytbyp
another sum of Rs.l0,000″/;”iand as.a5.000/Q
under this head. V t t
9. As Rs.26,710/Qtswsr-disc: Tribunal towards
medical perwrriiedicai bills produced by
the the same is just and
proper aridthere is no scope for enhancement.
_ :,.j’iClain1antV”was treated as inpatient for 5 days in
hospital, Udupi and continued
follow treatment. Considering the same, Rs.3,000/–
A. awarded by the Tribunal towards incidental expenses is
t on the lower side and it is deserved to be enhanced by
(Es
another Rs.3,000/– and I award Rs.6,000/– under this
head.
11. Claimant claims to have been earning Rs.4,000/~
per month by working in abroad. But the not
established. In the absence of proof
income assessed by the Tribun.,al at” pergé
month is just and proper. “of
that he must have been restand for
period of four months. award. 1a2.:§.12,o0o/-
towards loss of ir1coI’b.e_.duririg:’laid ‘period.
12. examined the doctor
regardingdisabil1ifi¢;–~__:{s«.not entitled for compensation
under the hieadlvlosls future income.
the absence of evidence of the doctor regarding
V Tribunal considering fracture of both
‘bones. ‘right leg, has rightly awarded a sum of
A /– towards loss of amenities. The same is just
” ” and proper and there is no scope for enhancement.
955
14. Claimant was operated with fixation of implants
and they are required to be removed. Therefore, a sum
of Rs.10,000/»~ is awarded towards future _medical
expenses.
15. Thus the claimant is entitled 4_
compensation:
1) Pain and suffering Rs, ‘~
2) Medical expenses 2 Rs”; 2V6′,’7fi0/~
3) Incidental expenses p T 6,000/– V
4] Towards loss of income ” . _ 3
during .la~i.d upeptmcid Rs”; *12,oo0/~
5) Towards”los.s of amenities Rs. 8,000/~
8) Future medicaliV”eXpe_ns”esj.v _’_1.Rs. 10,000/–
16. is allowed in part and the
Judgment of the Tribunal is modified to the
stated above. The claimant is entitled for
1 he efornpensation of Rs.97,710/– as against
VF?—.s.6–_2{‘7.l:’0A/~ awarded by the Tribunal with interest at
is 6% on the enhanced compensation of Rs.35,000/–
the date of claim petition till the date of
realisation.
17. The Insurance Co. is directed to deposit the
enhanced cornpensation amount with interest within
two months from the date of receipt of a copy.___0f this
judgment.
18. Out of the enhanced compensation
proportionate interest is orde”red’to he invjested’in 1′.
in any nationalized or the
the claimant for a period . years’
amount with pr0p:orti0n’ate’pA isivvordered to be
released in his fa\ro1Ai_1:f.v:” ‘i i i
No {wider as t.o”e.osts.–
sar-
jadcie