Karnataka High Court
Laxman Basavantappa Jadhav vs The Oriental Insurance Co Ltd on 18 September, 2008
Bench: V.G Sabhahit, S.N.Satyanarayana
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD _" _ _
DATED THIS THE 18111 DAY OF' SE1=*:'E_MEE_RV .2'oSS 3
THE HONBLE MR.JuS*r1cE.vE.;S,SAERgsRIj*E '~ E'
AN._[")'*~..% 3; V
at THE HONBLE SASA'LAI'YANA'RAYA.NA
CO fleck 65 \lM\&t ' " ' '
¢mmbeEs 0'€d€'€
> MFA".¥\':'.{)..27'.Q7}{f'.;a_O€54fi§rES)'1' _
~' BETWEENS
/fiflfiflwn LAXMAN"'E3AS}WAN'i?¢X'PPA.JADHAV" '
(S N six ) 39 YEARS, oCc:':_1vcARrMAN'~-..__ j
'3Upf,\[._7_ R/O HAVERIPETR,j£sEH.R~tE__c<m'oN
MARKET, VSRANEEPRAEAVARE om
DHARWAD.__ " ' 1
_ ' APPELLANT'
(E_s'{Sn1_S R..SRAJEfiDR.--E~,SR1 S.M.KARNOOLKAR,ADVS.,)
1 THE O;RiENTAL INSURANCE co LTB
BANGALORE
'REP. BY ITS LOCAL BRANCH
A. B'? THE DiVZSiONAL MANAGER
" ORIENTAL INSURANCE co m)
HUBLI
...RESPONDEN'I'
H {BY SRI v. NARAYANASWAMY, ADV.,)
MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT 1988 AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT' AND AWARD f)A'I'ED:16.12.03 PASSED EN MVC
160.361/O0 ON THE FILE OF THE 11 ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE
(SRDN) AND ADDL. MACT, DHARWAD, PARTLY ALLOWING THE
CLAEM PETFTION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF' COMPENSATION.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY,
BATYANARAYANA J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGENT
This is claimanth appeal seeking enhaneemfient of
compensation awarded in MVC l\¥o.361
of the :1 Additional Civil Judge (Sr.Dn)_,_
MACT., Dharwad.
2. The facts 1eadiVng4_ to ~'
11.10.99, the claimant hereiixfifiras the tea
stall near Jamadar Guarage. At
that No.KA-01/7905 came in a
Beinwgvgjgitien in a rash and negligent manner
' its. knocked down the claimant who was
H I-'~.xt.and1VV'.1'zV of the tea stall. As a result, the
clalmt hsnffered gievous injuries.
E 3. It is the case of the claimant that he was
to District Hospital, Dhaxwad and later shifted to
KIMS Hospital, I-Iubli for further treatment, he was
inpatient in the said hospital from 11.10.99 to 4.2.2000.
"W?
During that time, two surgeries were performed, left
leg was amputated above the knee, he was
for the fracture of right and left leg
femur, tibia and pehris. The
by the injuries suffered___ £'3.cf':'t'1.i'.3§Ii{}',§;1.'.ViIi".>
MVC No.36 1/2000 meg» insurer
of the oifending ' _ the
owner-respondent The
Insurance No.2 entered t "etatement of objections. Theteafcer, and the claimant adducect tin: of his claim as PW1 and e:tamineti""e;Ie..«witness-PW2 in support of his case who substantiated the injuries that the suffered in the said accident was examiitiedv as PW3. In addition to that he has V' '(f 20 documents as Exs.PI to P20.
4. Based on the pleadings, evidence of PWs.1 to H 3, the documents which are available on record, the Tribunal partly ailowed the petition of the claimant and W! awarded a sum of Rs.3,95,000/- along with the rate of 9% p.a. as compensation to The claimant being aggrieve(:}.....by compensation awarded by "
this appeal.
5. In this 1=* i'eepondent--
owner was absent before the on the 21"' which was
6. the parties and after going , é_ ttge and award, the documents and the deposititiions of the parties available on record, it is swan» ant herein was working as a cartman income of Rs.50/~-- per day. The Doctor V' 'adduced evidence in support; of the irzjuries that ' the claimant has sufiemd viz, amputation of left leg obove the knee and also other injuries that he has suffered by fracture of pelvis, has assessed disability at W'! 100% and deposed that the claimant is not to oontinue his Work as there is total lees-_' capacity of the claimant.
Doctor, the Tribunal has 41':1'*1e:'"'notio[1f'1a1 the claimant at Rs. the 'V multiplier of <18! atvtlxe relevant point of time isA25 E%st'*.2;¥'f§);-i)O0/- towards loss of future to . __ .'VVfe1t_' that the quantum of the Tribunal towards less of dis and proper and therefore the require to be interfered with. F1n'ther, awarded a sum of Rs.90,000/- to the account of his amputation to his left leg V. "a?oo§reV"t}1e knee and also two fractures that he -has i.e., to his right femoum bone and right tibia V' " "bone and the pain and suflering he has undergone also appears to be just and proper. However, while awaniing compensation under the head of amenities, the Txiburnal has awarded a meagne amount of . W?
Rs.25,000/- considering the nature of by the claimant and the period of the treatment that he has lgixdergone, His V' required' to be increased Rs.50,000/~-- and the % or"
Rs. 10,000/- towarwdg A ' ""AdV§mittedly, the claimant was in of fom' months. During that operation and amputaticaii knee, therefore the aware?" an not . to be interfeieci It case of the claimant that he % A a resirj¢n: of Dharwad and that he was admitted to e and during that period he has spent V --V a 10,000/- and the same is enhanced to & k Q 12s.2o,ooo/--. Taking into consideration, the modified * enioijnt of compensation, the claimant is entitled to a e compensation of Rs.4,30,000/-. '""l
9. Accordingly, this appeal is aflowcdf The claimant is entitled to Rs.4,30,000/- from the 2nd interest at 9% per thA<§'-date the date of payment.
The Tribunal % of the total award fixed deposit 6%' 6 V g -»,:\'\ A guk H' : ;s.\*k.?;' B,"
The said uxdar we compensation also.
Sd/--
Judge Sd/3...;
Iudgé L._