High Court Karnataka High Court

Yamanappa vs Mahendrasingh on 22 January, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Yamanappa vs Mahendrasingh on 22 January, 2010
Author: V.Jagannathan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD

DATED THIS THE 22nd DAY OF JANUARfx';fi2..C:  

BEFORE

M.F.A.No. 12029/20o7AN%(Mv)V  . _ 1 A 

THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICEV; J;AG§AN.1Nf23g;i5E_I£§g'P€'«' 

BETWEEN:

1.

D3ISTi’K0PPAL*—~ -4 A

YAMANAPPA

s/0 HOLIYAPPA GU_’i”T_URj
AGE:58 YEARS _ ;

OCC:AGRICULTURIST — _ ‘
R/0 KANDAKUR ”

TALUK:KU§SH’£A’GI ._ A
DISTRICT:£{QF?P_AL.’v

SATYAVMA/IA’-« ?:_,_ _

w/,0 YAIVIr’\_fN,API?.A G.U’§?TUR —

AGIi=2;48 ‘ ‘

OCC:’HOUSEHOI.;D_ ”

R/O KANDAKUR VILLAGE

TA.LUK:K’us_HTAG1

APPELLANTS

Adv.)

MAHuE:NDRAs1NGa

.. VAS/O'”:3HAIRSINGH
” _ MAJOR,

‘C–Cc;0wNER 01″? LORRY
; BEARING REG. NO. op 80 9951
< R/0 WIL AALGHARm

P0sT:ARBAN, 1:)1sT;AAGRA

Ix)

STATE UTTAR PRADESH.

2. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE co, LTD,
REP. BY ITS
DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
‘v’.\x’.SUi{ilAl’\fiCOlviPLEX, A’
RAICHUR. RESP’0’NJ)ENTsV

(By Sri.G~.N.Raichur, Adv. for R2)

This appeal is filed u/s li73._V{1) ia’1’v.1\}1′-.r Ace iaga.i.ns.t theaii’

judgment and award dated 2″1t..VO’2.20O7″‘._pass.ed'”,in MVC
No.462/2006 on the file of l\/l§l1i’il’b_€I”,.._’ Additional MACT 85
Presiding Officer, Fast,’ii’rack.”iCouart No.1, Koippal, partly
allowing the claim petition” for eomipensation and seeking
enhancement for compensation. L *

delivered the fo_lloWiri’g:_’t . — V V

This appeal*c_o’mingi on for day, the court

Heard the for the parties in respect of

the appeal pre’ferred_by itheitlaimants seeking enhancement of

V’e0.mP’é.fi:sa:§.iOn..,_ ” A ….. .. v

learned counsel for the appellants

submits t.._’riat-the MACT erred in taking the income of the

it i.viA”‘~dLec.eased of the appellants at Rs.7O per day which is on the

i a1ower”~-side. Therefore, the compensation be increased.

, ?’

‘~..a~J

3. On the other hand, Sri.G.N.Raichur, learned counsel for

the insurance Company supports the award of the Trib_’L’1n:a’1.,

4. Taking note of the evidence on record and the ‘d_e’ceased~« _

son of the appellants being aged 23:5/ieaii*s’atl”.the

accident and as according to the clairnantshe doing ‘wo”r’kl”

in the agricultural fields and allso’–vr.ii:ending
have been taken at Rs.1Q{3.per ooy’ aindlllconsedueintiyiltowards
loss of dependency after his personal
expenses as the bachelor’, of dependency
will work outi-v(“:e~o0.x12x14). The Motor
Accidents lias’verVr-aiovarded Rs. 151,200/-.
Therefore /-. The said amount

will carry inteiesit at lo”/op_.a.V.a.i1d the apportionment shall be as

paper the o;o1o:~ of the Appeal is allowed in part.