{"id":215843,"date":"2009-12-10T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-12-09T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manjula-wo-umapathi-g-vs-the-managing-director-karnataka-on-10-december-2009"},"modified":"2016-07-27T09:18:51","modified_gmt":"2016-07-27T03:48:51","slug":"manjula-wo-umapathi-g-vs-the-managing-director-karnataka-on-10-december-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manjula-wo-umapathi-g-vs-the-managing-director-karnataka-on-10-december-2009","title":{"rendered":"Manjula W\/O Umapathi G vs The Managing Director Karnataka … on 10 December, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Manjula W\/O Umapathi G vs The Managing Director Karnataka … on 10 December, 2009<\/div>\n
Author: V.Gopalagowda And A.S.Bopanna<\/div>\n
E\n\nIN THE HXGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE\n\nDATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2009\n\nPRESENT\n\nTHE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. GOPALA;GQWIjA \n\nAND\n\nTHE HON'}3LE  ' \nM.F.A. NO. 928 1 \/20OA5V.[MW    ' A\n1\\\/E.F.A. No. 5X19.\/2.006 (Mm   -A\n\nMFA No. 9281[05\n\nBETWEEN:\n\nSMT. MANJLILA' :1MAPATHI::O?.\"-- A. \n\nAOED\"ABOm'. 32 $;'%jEARsg' _\nR\/AT';%1A1AN,AYA'-ANA}z.Am_,1' -\n\nCARMEJLAROM POS~'i'_ ' __  \n\nBANGALORE m 5so\"o35   APPELLANT\n\n(By SR; P N NANVJVAREDDY, ADV.)\n\n    DIRECTOR\n\nKARNf:ATAKA STATE ROAD\n TRANSPORT CORPORATION\n..  OFFICE, SHANTHINAGAR\nDOUBLE ROAD. BA1\\EGALORE-- 27\n\nE'    SR1 E NARALYANASWAMY\n\nS\/O ERAPPA\nAGED ABOUT 34 YEARS\n\nJ;\n\n..\n\n\n\n7\n4,\n\nTOKEN NO. 4422, III DEPOT\nKSRTC, BUS STAND\nBANGALORE ** 560 009  RESPONDENTS\n\n{BY SMT. SUMANGALA A SWAMY, ADV. FOR R1}\n\nTHIS APPEAL IS FILED U\/S 173 (1) OP-\":Mx?j\".ACT\n\nAGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DTD I ..'1\"I-3,1835 _\nPASSED IN MVC NO. 303\/03 ON THE FILi3._O.\u00a53'=._THET\u00bb\\{'I *\nADDL. SCJ AND MEMBER, MACT, BANGALORE... ('SUCH-__2}'\u00bb\n\nPARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM '_PET\u00a3'I_TI-ON -JFOR\nCOMPENSATION AND SEEKING ,EN:HANC.EMEN'T__ \nCOMPENSATION.     I  \n\nMFA N0. 5ll9[O6\n\nBETWEEN;\nTHE MANAGING DIREC.T_(jP,  '\n\nKS RTC,SHAN'1'HINAGAR'~AI _ _  - \nDOUBLE ROA'D,';BANGALOREw 27   \n\nREPT. CH2I;E--F \"LAW OFFICER\nK S RIT C. BANGALORE . g  APPELLANT\n[By  ADV. FOR R1]\n\nAND=:\u00bb _\n\n. . - M2X1\\IJIiT'LA'Y,W\/O' IEII\/IAPATIII G\n A ACED--TATf3\u00bbOUTv35 YEARS\n' ~.. R,f.AT HALANAYAKANAHALLI\n\nCARMELAIIIOM POST\nBANGALORE -- 560 035  RESPONDENT\n\n [BY S'R1__ P N NANJAREDDY, ADV.)\n\n  THIS APPEAL IS FILED U\/S I73 III OF MV ACT\n  AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DTD 1.8.8.05\n I H PASSED IN MVC NO. 303\/03 ON THE FILE OF THE VI\n\n\u00a3\n\n,--r\n\nan\n\n\n\n2\n\nADDL. SCJ AND MEMBER. MACT, COURT OF SMALL\nCAUSES, METROPOLI'l\"AN AREA. BANGALORE. (SCCl\"lw2}\nAWARDING A COMPENSATION OF Rs. 55,30,300\/W 'WITH\nINTEREST AT 7% PER ANNUM FROM THE DATE OF\nPE3TlTlOl\\l T I LL DEPOSIT.\n\nThese Appeals coming on for admission, day,\n\nA.S. BOPANNA.J., delivered the following :    _ \n\nJUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
In M.F.A.No.928l\/2005, I-e:h”e~c1aimat\ufb01fn’ls.sSlberolaz A<\/p>\n
this Court seeking enhancement of the <\/p>\n
as against the sum awardediby t1’ie_lMootor’1.:Aelcidentll<\/p>\n
Claims Tribunal, Bangalore’l’l(for–lshlor_t thelV”l”‘ribunal’] in
\nMVC No.303\/ 2003.  award the<\/p>\n
responde’nt~w ‘Cofr’ploratiofi–.’ is before this Court in<\/p>\n
M.F.A.No”;5<  l9" wilassailing the quantum of<\/p>\n
 conrpevnsation"as__awarded by the Tribunal. Since the<\/p>\n
'eor1.'ec:–t_n"ess_ "or_ otherwise of the award passed by the<\/p>\n
'l'ribunal'V-i}gfo.uld arise for Consideration in both these<\/p>\n
 appleallsgthe appeals are taken up together and disposed<\/p>\n
ff  this common judgment.\n<\/p>\n
w:””\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
2. At the outset since the Transport
\nCorporation has called in question the award passed by<\/p>\n
the Tribunal with regard to the quanVt;u:n*._V of<\/p>\n
compensation, the contention urged in i.;i__s\u00a7_<\/p>\n
Considered. if the same is Hanswered=the'”‘<\/p>\n
Corporation, thereafter the queisticirifovotlldi <\/p>\n
regard to the enhancernentl_of—\ufb02the compenSati_on._  Thef<\/p>\n
contentions urged  theg_…llearr;;~evd Coungselli for the
\nappellant in MFA  Transport
\nCorporation wo1;;l_d indicate tlie\u00abi:.lgrieVance is with
\nregard to  has been granted
\nby the Tribunalf.-~._:l  regard, the Tribunal has<\/p>\n
granted   ‘l2,.l3’9,34O\/M as per the medical bills<\/p>\n
roun’ded..vof the same to Rs.2,l0,000\/\u00ab.<\/p>\n
 pl  learned Counsel for the appellant contends<\/p>\n
that the  ought not to have been granted, a perusal<\/p>\n
 of the rezasons indicated by the Tribunal would indicate<\/p>\n
 medical bills which were produced and marked<\/p>\n
 Whave been looked into by the Tribunal and on finding<\/p>\n
ii<\/p>\n
-‘,’.’<\/p>\n
5<\/span>
\nthat the nature of the injuries requires such treatment:<\/p>\n
and there was nothing to doubt the said medical
\nevidence and the bills, the Tribunal has awarded the<\/p>\n
said sum. Even in this appeal also, there is~jr’1’of’otl’i.er<\/p>\n
rnai:e1*ial placed before this Court. to  <\/p>\n
and genuineness of the said miedlical. b\u00a7_lls_. asvsuoh<\/p>\n
in that regard, the contention  <\/p>\n
in the said appeal cannot bel:accepted_lanad.= <\/p>\n
awarded by the Tribunal  bills” is held to<\/p>\n
be justified.\n<\/p>\n
 ” l llthecontention put forth by the<\/p>\n
appellantin 2005 arises for consideration<\/p>\n
 Witllll.   enhancement as claimed by the<\/p>\n
  —in order to consider this aspect of the<\/p>\n
“ma:\u00a3er,lpe1′;r;ei~usa1 of the papers would indicate that the<\/p>\n
 claimant who is a lady and working as a tailor has<\/p>\n
 siift’ered the following injuries:<\/p>\n
l<\/p>\n
W’<\/p>\n
6<\/span><\/p>\n
 Fracture of shaft femur (Right)<\/p>\n
ii. Type 3 Compound Injury {Right} Hip <\/p>\n
iii. Cornminuted fracture lower <\/p>\n
with dislocation of ulnar   it
\niv. Head injury with  at
\nV. Anterior chip f7’ac_turel’of
\nVi. Displaced      l_  {Right}
\nsuperior  _   ranis fracture.”\n<\/p>\n
The Doctor  treat-ed  had been
\nexamined\u00a7.befo_re:t*he’    and the wound<\/p>\n
certificate ais__0_ mar.l_\u00a7ed’asVrV_E5x.P6 in evidence. The<\/p>\n
discharge “inarked as Ex.PlO. In addition<\/p>\n
to the salrriel, the .tre.a’tnjl~ent as rendered to the claimant<\/p>\n
 hasd?:be_er1VVy_stated3:1y’the doctor and the disability has<\/p>\n
 been s3;a’i;ed 57%. Considering the nature of the<\/p>\n
 are the opinion that a sum of Rs\/$0,000\/–<\/p>\n
 as awarded by the Tribunal towards pain. agony and<\/p>\n
 is on the lower side and the same requires to<\/p>\n
32<\/span><\/p>\n
Ty’<\/p>\n
#-\n<\/p>\n
be enhanced to Rs.5O.OO0\/W instead of Rs.40,000\/~ as<\/p>\n
awarded by the Tribunal. H  T.\n<\/p>\n
4. With regard to the Compensation <\/p>\n
towards food, conveyance and attendants <\/p>\n
same is on the lower side andhas’ suC,h_t’at._surn of<\/p>\n
Rs.20,0OO\/W is awarded jjnsteuad R\u00a7;Jte11%o;0oo’t,\u00a7*t..gig, <\/p>\n
awarded by the Tribunal.   the’<\/p>\n
nature of the injuriesand    lady had
\nalso suffered pubic fraeturet   a Case, even<\/p>\n
though the ;eo’rn._I:\u00a7ensatio11″‘:is””awa’rded under the other<\/p>\n
heads},,’a’– — requires to be awarded<\/p>\n
under the head 7.’of\u00ab…~~”loss of amenities since no<\/p>\n
  eo,in’pensa,tion has….been awarded by the Tribunal. under<\/p>\n
ht’ L’  ‘V staid’ h_e’a  –.\n<\/p>\n
 The next question with regard to the<\/p>\n
eonipensatiozn towards the loss of future income would<\/p>\n
  have to be considered. In this regard, it is noticed that<\/p>\n
32<\/span><\/p>\n
at’<\/p>\n
P’<\/p>\n
the Tribunal has reckoned the income at Rs.18,000\/-<\/p>\n
p.a. as notional income and it would be in a  of<\/p>\n
Rs.1.500\/– per month. Considering that <\/p>\n
was working as a tailor and even in the _c~as.efef a.:C\u00aboo1ie,-\u00bb. <\/p>\n
when this Court has been reckonizragratythe<\/p>\n
monthly wage at Rs.3,000\u00bb\/l~;\u00ab–_.in the iristai:i:tll’case Hallsolg <\/p>\n
sum of Rs.3,OO0\/A per  -to   In
\nthat View, if the  ll”isv’:..:recl\u00a7oned and the
\ndisability as   at 57% to the
\nlimb is taltelnxlatllllleast the disability
\nat 20%   releiltoiiled being about I \/3″‘ of
\nthe  “l the doctor. Further,<\/p>\n
coiisiderin-gll the ~__age  the claimant, the multiplier<\/p>\n
  wo’ti1dEhaV__e toAAbevvre.c’ko11ed at 16. If the said parameters<\/p>\n
  the appropriate multiplier of 16 is<\/p>\n
 claimant would be entitled to the sum of<\/p>\n
 Rs.1,”1yvbLi.200\/- under the head of loss of future income<\/p>\n
 of a sum of Rs.51,300\/- as awarded by the<\/p>\n
V’   Tribunal. %<\/p>\n
u-””\n<\/p>\n
p.\n<\/p>\n
9<\/span><\/p>\n
6. Since we have now indicated the income to
\nbe at Rs.3,OOO\/W per month, the cornpensation awarded<\/p>\n
towards loss of income during laid up period xvo11l_l’d_:l_also<\/p>\n
have to be enhanced in terms of the same.__=:.. <\/p>\n
sum of Rs.18,000\/- is awarded…\u00bbu.nder”Mtheiiisaidlleadll<\/p>\n
instead of Rs.9.000\/~ as awarded  <\/p>\n
addition to the same, thevivpll\u00e9trriourit.__aWar=deCl””towardsl”V<\/p>\n
medical expenses and future’ rnedlical expenses is also<\/p>\n
sustained.\n<\/p>\n
  thVeeVd.clac_irna11t\/ appellant in all would<\/p>\n
be entitleld–._Vto-  total…leompensat.ion of Rs.4.63,200\/~.<\/p>\n
   Tribun.al\u00ab’ha.s already awarded a sum of<\/p>\n
the claimant would be entitled to be<\/p>\n
.o’i5’i..Rds.1.32,9O0\/- by way of enhancement with<\/p>\n
inter\u20acSVt_A’i~at 7% p.a. from the date of the petition till<\/p>\n
 The enhanced portion of the compensation<\/p>\n
__shall be deposited by the respondent\/Corporation<\/p>\n
3;\n<\/p>\n
p<\/p>\n
within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a
\ncopy of this order. The statutory deposit  be
\ntransferred to the Tribunal.\n<\/p>\n
In terms of the ab0Ve_.,\u00bb~~the   <\/p>\n
No.9281 \/ 2005 is allowed in parr;’a::\u00a7_ri <\/p>\n
No.51 19 \/ 2006 stands   order: a;s{fo”r:osts ” V<\/p>\n
 V   <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Manjula W\/O Umapathi G vs The Managing Director Karnataka … on 10 December, 2009 Author: V.Gopalagowda And A.S.Bopanna E IN THE HXGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2009 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE V. GOPALA;GQWIjA AND THE HON’}3LE ‘ M.F.A. NO. 928 1 \/20OA5V.[MW ‘ […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-215843","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nManjula W\/O Umapathi G vs The Managing Director Karnataka ... on 10 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manjula-wo-umapathi-g-vs-the-managing-director-karnataka-on-10-december-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Manjula W\/O Umapathi G vs The Managing Director Karnataka ... on 10 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manjula-wo-umapathi-g-vs-the-managing-director-karnataka-on-10-december-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-12-09T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-07-27T03:48:51+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manjula-wo-umapathi-g-vs-the-managing-director-karnataka-on-10-december-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manjula-wo-umapathi-g-vs-the-managing-director-karnataka-on-10-december-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Manjula W\\\/O Umapathi G vs The Managing Director Karnataka … on 10 December, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-12-09T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-07-27T03:48:51+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manjula-wo-umapathi-g-vs-the-managing-director-karnataka-on-10-december-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1074,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manjula-wo-umapathi-g-vs-the-managing-director-karnataka-on-10-december-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manjula-wo-umapathi-g-vs-the-managing-director-karnataka-on-10-december-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manjula-wo-umapathi-g-vs-the-managing-director-karnataka-on-10-december-2009\",\"name\":\"Manjula W\\\/O Umapathi G vs The Managing Director Karnataka ... on 10 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-12-09T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-07-27T03:48:51+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manjula-wo-umapathi-g-vs-the-managing-director-karnataka-on-10-december-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manjula-wo-umapathi-g-vs-the-managing-director-karnataka-on-10-december-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manjula-wo-umapathi-g-vs-the-managing-director-karnataka-on-10-december-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Manjula W\\\/O Umapathi G vs The Managing Director Karnataka … on 10 December, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Manjula W\/O Umapathi G vs The Managing Director Karnataka ... on 10 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manjula-wo-umapathi-g-vs-the-managing-director-karnataka-on-10-december-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Manjula W\/O Umapathi G vs The Managing Director Karnataka ... on 10 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manjula-wo-umapathi-g-vs-the-managing-director-karnataka-on-10-december-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-12-09T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-07-27T03:48:51+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manjula-wo-umapathi-g-vs-the-managing-director-karnataka-on-10-december-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manjula-wo-umapathi-g-vs-the-managing-director-karnataka-on-10-december-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Manjula W\/O Umapathi G vs The Managing Director Karnataka … on 10 December, 2009","datePublished":"2009-12-09T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-07-27T03:48:51+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manjula-wo-umapathi-g-vs-the-managing-director-karnataka-on-10-december-2009"},"wordCount":1074,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manjula-wo-umapathi-g-vs-the-managing-director-karnataka-on-10-december-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manjula-wo-umapathi-g-vs-the-managing-director-karnataka-on-10-december-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manjula-wo-umapathi-g-vs-the-managing-director-karnataka-on-10-december-2009","name":"Manjula W\/O Umapathi G vs The Managing Director Karnataka ... on 10 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-12-09T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-07-27T03:48:51+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manjula-wo-umapathi-g-vs-the-managing-director-karnataka-on-10-december-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manjula-wo-umapathi-g-vs-the-managing-director-karnataka-on-10-december-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manjula-wo-umapathi-g-vs-the-managing-director-karnataka-on-10-december-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Manjula W\/O Umapathi G vs The Managing Director Karnataka … on 10 December, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/215843","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=215843"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/215843\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=215843"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=215843"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=215843"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}