Kheera Jaju Gouda, vs Ananth S/O Subray Gaonkar, on 2 September, 2013

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Kheera Jaju Gouda, vs Ananth S/O Subray Gaonkar, on 2 September, 2013

Bench: H.N.Nagamohan Das

                            :1:




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                    DHARWAD BENCH

       DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2013

                         BEFORE

     THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE H.N.NAGAMOHAN DAS

                M.F.A. NO. 22863/2010 (MV)

BETWEEN:

KHEERA JAJU GOUDA
AGE 29 YEARS, OCC.MAISON,
R/O. SAKALABENA,
AVERSA, TQ. ANKOLA,
DIST.UTTAR KANNADA
NOW RESIDING AT
C/O. NEELA W/O.NAGESH GOUDA
BAITHKOLA, KARWAD,
DIST. UTTAR KANNADA.
                                             ...APPELLANT

(BY SRI A.S. PATIL, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.   ANANTH
     S/O.SUBRAY GAONKAR
     AGE. MAJOR,
     OCC.OWNER OF VEHICLE
     BEARING NO.KA-31/2903
     C/O.BALAKRISHNA VISHRANT NAIK,
     R/O. HARAWADA, TQ. ANKOLA,
     DIST. UTTAR KANNADA.

2.   THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE
     COMPANY LTD., BRANCH OFFICE
     HIGH CHURCH ROAD, KARWAR
     DIST. UTTAR KANNADA.

3.   BALAKRISHNA
     S/O.VISHRANT NAIK
                              :2:




      AGE. MAJOR,
      OCC.BUSINESS,
      R/O. HARAWADA, TQ.ANKOLA
      DIST. UTTAR KANNADA.
                                              ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI M.K. SOUDAGAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
    SRI PRAVEEN P. TARIKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R3;
    R1- SERVED)

      THIS M.F.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE
M.V. ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED
18.01.2010 PASSED IN M.V.C. NO. 58/2008 ON THEFILE OF
THE II ADDL. M.A.C.T., KARWAR PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM
PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT
OF COMPENSATION.

     THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

                         JUDGMENT

The appellants being aggrieved by the inadequacy of compensation awarded by the Tribunal vide judgment dated 18.01.2010 in M.V.C. No.58/2008 passed by M.A.C.T., Karwar is before this Court in this appeal.

2. The Tribunal by considering the entire evidence on record granted global compensation of Rs.9,000/-. Ex.P-6 is the medical bill issued by Arya Medical and Research Centre at Ankola for a sum of Rs.8,650/-. A perusal of the medical bill specifies that appellant was inpatient for 9 days and took :3: treatment. There is no reason to disbelieve this medical bill. The Tribunal committed a mistake in not granting any compensation under the head medical expenses, towards loss of income during laid-up period, food and nourishment. In all, the appellant is entitled for additional compensation of Rs.10,000/-. To this extent, impugned award requires modification. Accordingly, I pass the following:

ORDER

i) The appeal is partly allowed.

ii) The impugned award dated 18.01.2010 in M.V.C. No.58/2008 passed by the M.A.C.T., Karwar is modified enhancing the total compensation from Rs.9,000/- to Rs.19,000/-.

iii) Remaining all other aspects, the award remains intact and undisturbed.

Sd/-

JUDGE hnm/

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court