IN THE man comm’ OF KARNATAKA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD, ‘ K v
DATED THIS THE 15′”! DAY OI?f»V’.$EPFE’iviB;3′;}§ 2doa_ _! ”
Pazsamj
THE HON’BLE MR.JU’.3′}’ICE ‘¥.f_.C}. it ”
. ~29?
THE HOIWBLE mR”.jJus:r:<;::3"s~.sA*I'¥ANARAYANA
A.
’71’
CtmY€(:9ceei xixdw
Qkctambu OKAM
cu. :6-\.n»og~ BE’I’WEEN__:~~ ~
&/,.,J…»/V’; . vrr1–1AL gU:~:p’u ‘%;ApoL:<_.AR" .
' 48 YRS. ~ L %
AGAn,
DIST:BEL(}A¥JML-
V M.F.A§VN(§.1V1fiZVfV20G5(Rflv3V
. .. APPELLANT
– _ B NARGLINH & sm’.soNA VAKKUNB, ADVs., )
”
1 MGMNLAL
.. S/.0 NARUMAL NIRANKARI
MAJOR
— occ;Bus1NEss,
R/AT DHAVLI-PONDA, GOA.
THE BRANCH MANAGER
THE NATIONL INSURANCE CO. L’I’D.,
1241, ‘E’WARD, ASHIRWAD, SI-{AI-{I MILL
ROAD, KOLHAPUR,
REP. BYITS DMMANAGER
‘THE NATIGNAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
RAMDEV GALLI, BELGAUM.
12EsPoN1:3s:?’.§t’;fs _%’%%:’%’.;~ f
(By Sri B c SEEPHARAMA RAG, ADV., FOR :22;-{A V L” %
R1 NOTICE DISPENSED wrm )_ . V ‘- *
MFA FILED U/S 173(1) 01?: Mv.TA§:r…ADL._.e3v1L JUDGE
(SR. on.) & AMACI’, BELGAUNL… PARTLY’ ALww1?m”‘THE
CLAIM PETYTION FOR COMPF}N’SATIOR’.. RED SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF CQ_MPENSATi’Q_N’;–.__ ”
THIS MFA comisiis %d.N THIS DAY,
suwuuuumxg J., DELIVEREB T1113 §~ja:)1;z.ow:N<3:
by the appellant seeking
V. '_ " .01' . compensation awarded in
'E¢iV'{3N¢;~1'2:5§'1/2001 on 4.11.2004 on the file of the
%Ir'zx:iditic3:1aI.%.1%.C:v:1%' ' Judge (Sr.Dn) & Additional MACT,
T hy '
2:9 The facts of the case are that, on 28.5.2001
gttppellant herein along with one Pandurang
mam Sutar were travelling in Bagaj Scooter be-arm' g
""7
No.M–8O No.MII-09/R-7822, when they were
Sulage village, the said scooter got
of them got down from the scooter K
walk by pushing the eeooe;:V
Belgaum Vengural Road. At "time,
bearing No.GA-01/E-4600 {mm m.ee.%%e;ee in a V
rash and negligent the
" .ee.eec«'¢~,»/
appellant herein and WI"-1o'\\a9teldag along
with mm' . AS elaxe ' v.–t.SustaJned'. gievmis
:1 Pandzn'ang Atamaram
Sutar died'_ ciaimant who suffered the
fr&et_1;re ef~~ other grievous injuries,
meeee MVC No.1241/2001 seeking
the driver and the insurer of the
V' " The driver and the insurer entered
'ag jpeara11oe'AA' through their counsel and filed their
a "statement 'W3
4. Another petition MVC No.145o/2eee[1e«e.}eres
also filed by the legal heirs of the
Atamaram Sutar who died in t11e.sa;11e K u
said claim petition filed by meee.e1ei:mente
clubbed together and _ Weft:
evidence was was
examined as PW1 -got marked as
Exs.PI to P13,’ %::«;n% sustained, the
doctor W119 m PW 2.
_’ pleadings, documents,
evidence _on_ partly allowed the
~ compensation to the
1:1 e “” ” sum of Rs.2,03,000/– in
e’MF”slCV N%):««12?¥1,?’2001 with interest at 6% per annum
frem. the of petition till payment. The claimant
: ‘eved by the quantum of compensation
% at by the Tribunal in the said claim petition has
= -chiallenged the same in this appeal. We’
6. in this appeal, notice on the 1″
was dispensm with, the 2*”!
was served, mtered
appeal.
7. Heard both ceung-_:1
for the parties and “gunmen:
and awrad and also documents
marked that the Tribunal
by of Pm-Doctor
has at Rs.70/ – per day
and awarded compensafion as
u:1s3’e’r:LA .
treatment and
” — gxpcnscs -Rs. 77 A00-00
suficrings -Rs. 30,000-00
AA ” of amenifies, comfort
‘happiness, ergoymcnt etc., -Rs. 20,000»-00
Future loss of inosme due to
disabifity -Rs. 75,esoo–oo
Total Rs.’2,03,000-00
“I
8. On going through the records, this is
of the opinion that the income taken by the %
the purpose of calculafion of future lossof is -.
the lower side. Accordingly, th£:_V in¢oi_n1e’ of
shall be taken at Rs.l00/_f ;$er *dgy
multiplier ’12’ which would to Re; and by
taking disability at can be
awarded to the oofi:1_1ie_s “tov’ :fis:’1,52,000/~ as
against Re.473§. *1i1bmm1. Further,
the the head of Medical
treatment Pain and sufferings is
just eompensation of Rs.20,0{)0/~
awaftiod head loss of amenities, comfort,
V’ kv:V)g!:)Iv)ij#:'(§;SS,’vA.V(‘3{:§]’.OyI[1CI1t ete., is required to be enhanced
.V 4 Furthe:r, it is seen that the Tribunal has not
V’ V’ V. any compensation to the claimant under the
‘ loss of income during the period of mzatment and
‘expenses, transportation and attendent charges.
Towards that, a sum of Rs.11,4{}O/–~ would be just and
“T
sufficient. Taking into consideration the
modification and the compensation that ;”‘i’S
under the other heads, the total
claimant would be entitled as ‘
against Rs.2,03,000/- aWaI’d_¢:d f;
10. According1y_, _is in part
awarding a sum of to
the with interest
at the of petition till the
date
Sd/-E
Judge
Sd/-4
Iudgé