New India Assurance Co Ltd vs M Prabhu on 1 July, 2011

[Cites 1, Cited by 2]

Karnataka High Court

New India Assurance Co Ltd vs M Prabhu on 1 July, 2011

Equivalent citations: 2012 AAC 247 (KAR), 2011 (4) AIR KANT HCR 417, (2012) 2 TAC 104, (2012) 3 ACC 454, (2011) 6 KANT LJ 646, (2012) 4 ACJ 2391

W

IN THE HIGH <:<:>UR:'1' OF KARNATAKA AT  

Dated This The 0153'? Day OfJuiy   L. T

BEFORE.  _ é "   

THE HQNBLE MR.JUsT1cEL'AR_?A_.§ N1'¥'C'r§;R¢§J   A'
MFA N<}.'?216 O F zocrégmv)  "  

Beetween:

New India, Assurance C0". .Lt:i., 

No.52, Vinay Complex V V'

Opp National College: .
Basavangudi V   '
Banga1ore~560  _ ' _ _ _ V_ .
BY ifs Managéf     4'   

(By Sri o.M;:hes:f::.»_};di:}»   :  

And: "" H " "i:v. ..  2 '-

L M.Pﬁé;bf1:;, S,/(V5 
Aged 22. years /"A No: SQ'

Kuvempuizagaxz :'._m's.kai..--'1"own
Bzgngaiore Dist." V '

V lR:€Ci&"%?§VV'ﬁét'a',30f
'  'E319 E\{Iun'irje'€'i:iy
 /A i'3?1"e:s:EV:"0nics

H '-- €;%:an€i'a.f3L1ré;;,VAn€ka1 'Taiuk

A B4ang3;ia:fé,-Disi.
'  ' . . . Responciems

   Sri Shripad \f'$has':;:i, Adv fez' R1 and Sri €3.?api Rédﬁjgﬂ
  fe:i~:' R2}

'§'h:$ MFA is; fiieé undész' S<~:<;:é§<}:: i'?f3§{l} <3?' E'??? A{:':,

 "ag92>;Li::s3i; €315: gzzéggzzéené and §§E=;'»i§I'd ﬁaiegé }3.G3§2f}{3'£' passsed in
* MVC f\§«:3g5§6"E';'2C%§8 an the fiiéj'. sf £1123 XE? ziddé. gEuég'€, C0211':

sf Smgzii CE'i':%.S€S., E¥E€m?::€-32*, ?v§;'xCT; §'vs'§§:i:°3§><:£§:.::3:: A?$Eig
§f3%éi.E§§§::"§G?€3} SSCCEE E\§<:335}§ 2'a35:a1:*«:ii:};,§ 23 ciz;-n":g:><::r"::»isa:§€}:"; {sf
§3€:~s..3,i§?,88§}f~ wéééz im'e:*€$f;   Eﬁg-'=;§ i"§'£;=::: 'ihs: ::i2:é;¢:';% 3?
§}€§i§:'i}:3 iii: €§é;%§}{}Si'£,;

J;7'"""'""'"""



 ,

I»)

This appeai coming on far I)ic::a"i;ing ¢JL:dgnie11{"<.:fiis

day? {he Court delivered {he feﬂowing: 5

JUDGMENT

The present appeai is by It has Challenged in this .ap1v§e~;;f-._the Correctness of the impt1ghed:"<,IL:d§1*1:.<§§_r:"E'Hewvard dated 3.03.200? passeg iI;v"MV'.'C '§'e'..568%/V2006 by the MAC? Bangalore SCCHJ5), (hereinafter Tribunal' for short).

2--.,_ The herein viz., M,Pr'abhu fﬂeﬁ his cxaifn. pee::tio:i7f:_a Said MVC3 No.5Ei67/2006 seek:;r1.geeeorIip'e:1;SaLi:iofi towards bodily injuries suffered result of the accident that occurred en Q2:§~v.e{bout 7 am. while he was travelling in bearing registratien NQeKé§wO3«A~--84? an "4"-__VV"Aneka§»vC«haVndapura Read near Avadadenahaﬁi Gate V' the Emits sf Aneiiai PS.

3., 'She fiE"i€§i13§};'S reessreieﬁ E33: ihe CEEEEIEZE 3"ri':3:1r:aE %;:h:;;i tfze szsié 2:,:::::§:§e:1§ es<:e::,m°::%::i es": :sai:i% eiaie. ifizrae zmé §}1£:(Tf€': 223:3 £3221: ii: w2t:5--;2 itziazsércl E31,: §E'ii'2: <3:*ive:* éfzf the {~H.~.,,»..w.my,,,.;

,_,,..;

said Bsiaxi Cab by driving it in 23. rash..em§i=.m1ie§§;1i.ger:t' manner have remained unehaiiengezi ; F;u:Et'E:'ef'~§inLeii,:j;§;' ef 'the Claims Tribeunai the: ihe fi:j*L::*e&~eV1e§--i:3.;1Ve:rAit respondent herein) euetai11eeI 'e'eb::.e"i:3i1_§z aeeavifesuit of the said accident feeiilied in his permanent disabiiity §9eI_ﬁeiﬁe§'ﬁgrxehaﬂenged. The appeilanft~i3ee§;;re:§:ha%e this appeal the findings of the liability of the :E1'1su:'e1:" the injured~e1aimar1i:

awarded " " also the quantum of c0mpensei€i_<e:;.{ _ _ 5'4._I have' heard the arguments of Sri O.Mahesh, 'V"Eee{f13e<iR"Cegnsel fer the appellanbinsurer and Sri and Praveen R.J;$, learned Counsel rep:eee:e1iinfg respeetiiveiy 'she first and second ";jesLpe%:'e£er}ts$ ezhe are claimant and the owner of the T."'~sVai:1.A'«Vehie1e. Perueeei the impugned Judgment and VA .._e;"::ire materiej feueﬁ if}. the reeerée ebteineé {rem the Qizaieze "§':*ib::::eL '<& <7'~'-W":m%W 6 between the plea taken by the insurer in the of objeetiens filed before the Claims %..t§;¢5 evidence of RW}, the officer ef eins:,ure»r, ajs 'ﬁe f taken by the insurer and i}?:e-rf_efeere'.:h'e iI1S'Lii'€:E'.: Carine? avoid the liability.

7. The plea taken"bVy the§:1eufeV§:"'{:'espon§en: No.2 before C1aimS.,T--':fib~unEi31} e£s_:'v.:e._}'i'i»S'_--liabiiiiy to indemnify the owxlerief 'vfehieIve';"_vO§1ie.E1 is at para No.8 of the 0bjVeeii"on elitateiiizieriie, 'feade ' ﬁnder:

"ﬁouéetéeaz VL?ie«.Ziab'iii:y_.of this respondent, gf any,'eie sru§jeet;:éVg;,$.f'ouisi:>n ef M1/' Act, RTO __§«Reeords,"' Agﬁermif. effeciive vaiid driving [i<f"<5f?1eeA~.gqf* the rider/driver :3/' {he offending inguesiien énvoived in {he accident 'c:.r:d "€'er.:'21s and eondiéions of issuance ef " in$3.§:fe:%2ce poiiey besides material sigzppresséon ej'fa;::{ regarding iFZUOE2)€F?"£€fZ€ Qf _.:?:is/ insured vehieie in {he said aeeioiené. "

8; On piajn reading of the abeve plea, it 1:3 quite eieer éhzii if; {ices 3r2<;£:e dieeiese as iii} w%1§e%': ef the {i£)1"'§Cii'Ei{}£'IE§i«, s;:7e§es:ti ie which side ieeuramte }}£)H{.'tj§ <;e:er:1e ie be ieeued GE iazhieh ef iéée ee:1e:§%€:ie:1e ef E:><;,E?{3 §.}§3§'fE1§§',, ea%:;je<:%§ ﬁe 'aeE':§<i:§z ihe eeeae bee been ieeuetii bf»; ¢.,,w.m.~':z, ~..1 the concerned Authority, has bash viokated by the owner of the said vehicie. F'ur':he:: RWI, the C)ffic€:r.vV{.)V_:f':-..%§_};§§ insuranca Ciarnpany, has stateci in his afﬁdavii. . as his €xami:1ati0n~ih~<:hief§ as tathe_a11eged"iri%§}afi€)i:. of §)€'I'YI1ii condition by the insured

3. Respondent N01 uséd.,_:f;h;_e ixiéurhred the purpose pf stag§f=.<::ar:fiaLe3;é' «-iifﬁ-stezﬁid of contract Carri=§g;3 1--f§es§§dVé::».V__V€:§\'fer Ioaﬁiegci the vehicle with pas'Sé_§r;gé};»V 17x!E::fT:{¥gﬁ.,'b2Vf_i01at€d the and also of i:':'§siia'bi}i't3: 0:: {ha wto indemnify the H the."VVW;V:0iicy produced in V'.Aevidéncé'«.'a«I.0i:g'h'vgiih ths permit and charge éh§ét..

sﬁiuffice itx7t0'**:;*a§z that the above ezviderxce also (ices _:i'Q:"diésC1%3s»¥3.,_é:g to which of the cerzditions, of Etithéi' ih.S:i:jahce poiicy or EXRB permit has b€€I} V'-».vi0i3.té::(§__A'1~by the insured. Further, ii: aisa does r:«:>t how Ehs Said bus was plied as 'stage carriage' VA .V the I'€?§€¥8.ﬁt ﬁaia iifﬁéi' anﬁ piaiéé'; of a:::{%§é€r':'§,. is; the iigivey {}§ thé 33$ izghvolvegi iﬁ éhs ssaici 2:t:<:id:::':t. it is ;::s;::°"{ih€::é 3:) :1::>i:s:> 'ihazis 'éihisrg i:";:3::§€§., b€§::§.§;; 21"? rer:»;§§:=:3_:i€:":i g"/""'»-w,»..%WM.«»* {r~va:-m4AJS\,, before the Clairns Tribunal, has not chosen examine the said driver. If it were be so ihégte e;.25ici._f bus was plied as 'stage CCUTi{1Q€'1 i{1 {f1eie;iio:e the eenditions ef either' the_ins1i';"ef:ce er permit, nothing preventedk.:VV:f1"1e_ C3','c">e1I1ee1 representing the .'»iC}aims 'Vfrii§una1 to eroeeexamine RW2, jehan the driver of the said relevant date, time from him how the said bee e«:1rriage* at the reievant time of aC'eident."= V' F2:QmA'Vthe*----e'::0x7e pleadings and evidence placed me appeilanbinsurer before the Claims T quite dear that the insurer, besides net V'~».:aking.§§;eeifie plea as te the aﬁeged vieiaiien of any of " ._tE1e {§OI1(iiiZi€)1ES ef either the insurance peliey er the V. .,Vp:e:'::1it, has net piaeed can record any acceptable evidenee and thus, faﬂed ie peeve aey ef the etetut/erg eiefeneee eva§ie{b§e 're him inétéusiéng the eléegeé ifiéﬁiéﬁiéri ef séézedééieize ef §:'1S3:i§'EE,1EC€ ?§}§{Z}? ?i?§'1?.Ei%«e

3)"):N'~N"'u.'"""'A~..,,"w'_,,,.»»r/<2 4,,m..".m IO

12. Having re§;a:'d to the abeve nature of pleadings and evidence piaceci on FECGFC1 by the appsliéiit» insurancé Company befere the Claims '£'riI3unag'§"'s:ri:i-.éii§é:;:

in View of the decision of this Caugfﬁ in ;*cfe:+1fe{i_'4 ':0 supra, I have no alternativey'-._bu:j:'1:25 «ltéid appe11ar1t~insurer Compafiy"--~.V.. is v. ii:1bie compensation to the first res§Qﬁ'd¢1';t_§cIaim?:r;t. V?

13. As to the Q_§ v:z':£§eI:1'1'1§ensation, Sri Olvfaheshé ' 2'7§7;'.j531%_:f3%)pe11ant~insurer strongly Tfibunai ha$ awarded h§:'é€iVV"V»;:}3'ain and Suﬁérings'; Rs.1,7fi;8V(:)0/V- of future earnings' and Rs.1§':,--f.1Q0/'§*':sﬁ>wa§"dS"-'iéés ef 0,meniZ1'es and enjoyment "'a.12 ci' fhéée ébzxjountsmof compensation are on higher scale; L"'hai;*i:ig'~v'fegﬁafiifio the riaturei of the injuries sustained anti-. th.V__é\:-> >;::té:1t gf permanent Iiabiliiy suffereé by the €i;?a;'gm3:1£ arid théirrrefore they require is be reduceﬁ ::Q"ns:i{i&rab1y.

E4; ?er cgrzéraa fsarried Ceuriseé fer §:}":e fizrsat §'%38§}{31"§§63}?/~{?1::1§E§i3ﬁ§ gézawngiy séiszaicfizzds 'iizfgzri "i.%::>:1g'h $5516 E}<::<::*:s::z:* 233:5; ggéazen f:','2»'i§€E1§':§ff £221'? 213 3 §"€S;s¥.l§i' <3? éghs. §:'1;f:::'i€s3 wi w,__«;f"'""~w~'*--~ww

18. It is reeerded by the Claims "Tribunal that as 3 reeult ef the eaid accident, the Claimant s::stai::Ve':£ the fe§1e\:szing injuries:

21) Fracture shaft left ferzami"

b) Fracture medial eendyle ef__1eft_ : V' C} Fracture left iliac: crest?

C1) Fracture of rigihﬁ e1b'e'xv" ' V ' and some other*mir1.Qr§ir;éju'1*iVe3 "

Further, it is.v«.1.9he:.;f'eeords that the claimant: 22.11.2006 1:0 27 said period, he was operafed ﬁmb and left upper limb for the said fVfaeVture's~.__ A 2"f§ef3§'3ﬁ¢_ed Ceerzsei fer the respondent --~ eiaimant stﬁrrigiiéf"'=:e1'i§e:ids that since the eiaimant was aged 21 yeérs see the date of {he accident the ameunt ef R.::;.__15,V03¢0/~ awarded by the Claims Tribunal under the "heads '£533 of ergiegnieizé and ezmersiiiesé is qeiée "'%::2:e<%eq1:a€:ee and iherefere, the same deeerafes %e be e12hei::i%e<§.. Eizzvéiégg fegzzré iie ihe zibwze ::2"ss:;m*e st}? §§'}€ ézagufeies s,--;ui"fe:"e§i eye {T?§EifiE"§':£ifi'il as 2: reezsiie ef éhe eaid ,r*'--«~e-...M;.,'..;.».w wwmi accident. the nature of permanent diszzbilitjfwhieh has to suffer throughout his life, hgtheage as on the date of accident, being' 2}"'ye'ars,' I» a'1n'V'C?f~--..:hi%:_' opinion that sum of Rs. L aﬁifgsefeied tribunal towards loss of er1joj,_:fﬁf_L:1*1'ev1:f1tVi¢_§:nci.a:1oe;;1ities is not adequate. Therefore his favour an additional sum of '»'eE_'r;e--V"same.

20. Vmeon1e/ reduction in earning.eagjaeviiﬁ-:;§}f_ the Claims Tribunal has aw§¢iardee1AVVVa"'s:1f2o;iof~1§sv;_1;'?~2,8OO/~ taking his income at Rs.4',@_C5G/-' and taking permanent d3isa1;>1i'ity at.' 20%' it is not in dispute that injureﬁ- Vtjaiiizaﬁf, a mason, is not a skilled labourer. In A'-other }~":e.}~has been an unskﬁiecl manna} labourer, it 'i.svwe£§.'sei'iV}ed that in cases of personaé injuries of <._seriou'~s 'naiure, as in the irzsf/ant ease, resuhimg in ":L:"pee£f1anent clisability,/. whiie eieiermining the loss ef ' fzsmre i:'1<::ome or fédilﬁiiﬁfl in {'EEi1"§1i1':g ea;3ac:iiy of {he irzgureé in éierzns ef me::e}', Toe:-siﬁes iihe rixatzzre and exieai ef ;3?;y§;s§<:ta§ ﬁisabiiié/ye %'/he effeeé ef seek phye§s:>::1§ c§;Zsz§:2i%%:;y sf hésfher €'?2§.§'IEiZ'1§§ i72*%e§32%{Z'§§,:F 3:: %;e:*?e:,-:5 es? :"§E(Z?iEéi%}7$ {w~.,«,,»mmW$»M,,.» e?..w,,Wa» 16 Le.' jfmteiionai disabiléig' of the injured. has to be Considered.

21' The Division bench of this court _ the ease of K Narasimha Mur.tJhy__ 'Vs Oriental Insurance Company another reported in 2004(3}"i_{ L--ef v.(i:)B) * is disabled jbr work he was___&:<;€I:gVw_»}::ejE.:§fe«T_e;;::cie§ient anda has no skill or talent_ loss of earning capacity has tqiige t§ii%fééf::V};::s_" he has to be compensated "on 1 bae ef teiiicii loss ..... . . 'Ft1]f§ih_e1;€.¢4V'it_is..'_a1s0eieeerxzed by this Court in the Caee <f:»f_ R 'Vs Rsaravanan reported in ZOUEACJ i?«1f§,' pera '$0.9 of the judgment as under:

a result of amputation, the been rendered a Cripple. He the heip of crutches even for ..\$§;>:5I1'§§14'1:1g. He has become unfit for any kind {if elanuai Werk. As he was eariieer 3 leader doing manual xeerk, the ampziiatiszm of his left leg beiew 1.~<;§:ee.. has rendered him unefit fer 3/1:? kieé ef marézzai Week. He has 118 fiiiéitiii/1f,§€}E1' is eégeth cases, i: is zeeil settied met ﬂee eeenemie esza furzetiezzai déeabiiiéy ;~)\44') yr' 5 -awmewwxkfx K €M>¥'».>,-»&»*®,«o& will have is be treated as total, even the physical disabiiity is not 100%." H u [Emphasie supp}-ie'§.i:gy me} u

23. Following the above dee-i.ei0r1s",a§'11avee.e£e;}ge;: 3 iégiew , :3 MFA 319.929 ef 2008 e/Wéﬁkiﬁfsx.VCRC5Be_iNe.2;'38/2008 disposed of on 3.1 as:-ur;§_:ief:V._': _

19. I a1ir_:*Qf the loss ef future Capacity of an injuifed Vt ":,pei*mar1ent physical hifilw a result ef the injtirsfiee' the accident has to be asseseeel ~ Jseonsideration 'functional d;1sabili:gu,iV" iv.e'.;v.'eXf;en«{ 0f the effect of his 'physical "disaAbiEi'ay.' on"his"earning capacity having regard V - u"3'aV0eati0n et<:.. aieoe besides eensidering H '--A .ihevV'efetve_n':,.Vef his physical disability. The reason Vfer the percentage of ffuneiionai disability' T ne.evd_tnet always be the same as the percentage of , :» 'f;hysieaZ disability' which the injured suffers. In 2.

given ease, though physical disabiliqg Suffered by an injured may be hardiy 100/£3 Gr 20%' e the fizrxeteienal disability icﬁa the extent; of the effect of hie ;.:zh:;ei<i:ai €i;§eaV%3i1ity 9:': his eernizig ee;:ae*§t,y, §"ze:x:i11g segeerei {.0 his egveeeiiezn may be more Sham ihe Pizyeiatei E}iee'ei§§§'}a 2%: 53213? eveiz 7£G€}'5%'§;, F2}:

é::si',a:":ee if an ézajezreﬁ §}€?ti,"5?3{3i1.; aazhze ifs; *<.:«::>e2:Eie:; 18 (Singer) by prefeseion suffers permarzemi in his eocaé chard, though his physical d'ifé.a¥3i1;§'i§?"A with respect to his whole body» than ihe extent of disability wen 'te"'?e'e:e:.;_ 'A chord, reduction in his e'erning".eé;paeif§,r--"--e.3:}er}?. "

ever: to the extent of 'he W0u1_rl_ 551$ te Sing. 0:: the ether eueh Q'a1'1...i11j§ured happens to be an ririeliiiiegiif-,r1:;e;i*x%;rari'iabeurer, the extent of redueretion ear1§:r;;§'.eeeaeity may be even less t§;i'é1'i*§:;fLiVs Therefore, it: is Cleari" less of future earnalnge.;%Vreri1ie£;i0r1"-jtinv' ea-rvnirrvg capacity of the inju:r_ed--_ s'u:'fi7ering permanent physiea} disabiiijtyzré 1;he "ef functional disability' having vﬁie avoeatierzﬁ has to be ;§_{j':f1s;i.s;.1e:ieci. _____ .. .

.""*,{%'_eurfﬁ*:'er, in its reeern: decision Er: the ease of Raj"""Ku:rzﬁ'g*""'v. Ajay Kumar and Another reported in 343 the Herfble Supreme Clesurt has held at Zpe.raAA'Nes,5 ta 6 and 9 'Le 12 0f its judgment, as under:

Para 5 The provision: of the Meta: Vehicles Act, 1988 {'Act* for short) makes it clear that the award must be just; which means that eemgensatiozz shotxié, m the extent geesihle, fuiig ané adequately eeetere the eiaimant 'ﬁe eke eeeitien prise is tile eeeident. Tire §.>§3;fe<::'z: ef zemzrdirzgg dzamzzgéze rise is €y,.»-m.»,<é,»».%_W__,z,_,A.,»»-> 20 {a} Loss of earning during V<ivf'--«:

treatment;

{In} Less of future €af31if3,§S'*Oﬁ~. é{:%eu§i1?§f;--~_%3ii'.:

permanem disabiiity.'-.. 2

(iii) Future medical exﬁetgﬂécs.

N0n~ pecuniary dé§in_age:S' arﬁé. ge}§+)

(iv) Damages for' trauma as a '

(v) I,-arse __{2;%(';<3'Lg'ef" '10ss of prospects V05?'i?'~53'?i¥':2*§é;e)«..'7i.'eA " ' "

('$3 life [shortening of V ' nerrﬁai' In rouVtiI1eV persotial injury cases, eompensatien be £a&»*3r§ed, only under heads ii], (ii)(a) and ' {i15*}.. I_t*i.s only in serieus Cases of injury, where %,he1'_e" i:S~._S§~p€CifiC medical evidence <::0rr<::borating 'th,e.e?.1}r:ie11ce of the claimant that eempensation " witiia granted under any of the heads (ii}(b), (iii), V ' ané (vi) reia/ting fi} 203:; of future earnings 0::

ejaecouzzi Qf permanent disability, future 5 medical expenees, less cf f:1i'1'l€i"§iEi€S {and/er lose sf pyeepeeés 05 nzarrﬁzzge) aizd E033 {:5 expeﬁaiien if life Fara § "§'he §er{:e:1'i,2:ge §:>f §;em:z1::e::£: éiisgﬁgéiiiy e2:;3:*eS:§e<i by ééze §}<}{:§ier:a; ae2Z.%.'/E: re§e:"ey:c:f:e is §,»«~»~,.«»«-v»-=*'*'<~%M,.»«/"w €»»_..,....» N be earning Capacity, arising {ram 21 permanent disability will be different from the pereenia;§e»e.0f permanent 8 ciisa't:>i1ity. Some "I'ribu:1a1fs,_f§y*.r:fi>2;i;g1Vf,?"A«H assume that in .311 eaeee, a part,ieii{arv..eeXfe:i"t"'--e "

( ercentafe} of ermanent e3,is2:J£:>i1i?':f'"ii€ee£:i<iV"'resu1: p 5 :3 _ Y K _ in a corresponding loss 0f:=__eaIj:i3i1f:ig 'e2ip.ae1ty;._/amgie f eorisequently, if 'the evidence'---pf<3dueede.".;s19icv{>v 5i;5§% V as the permanent disabgxﬁy, wi1'1hJoid.e:héj:%the§¢ is "

45% loss of future ear11i.n§§eCa;5a_eity; 1in..m9,§t of the cases, equating e2L.te1;:btvﬁ(ﬁere.énj:age) of loss of earning capacity fix fVbextei1f:VV_':(jjéercentagel of perrnane::.11'§+ciisa1)fi1it_§br' in award. of either too low flit 1:7%qo';'.higI;__a' cgompensation. Parav What be assessed by the effect__cf Ezhe permanently disability on"tVh'eVea.r_1_iin;g. éa.§Eas'i'cy of the injured; and after assessing the loss' earning capacity in terms of a »«.;¢:.1§efcenté:ge..pf the income, it has to be quantiﬁed in té':;i:1s_vM' money, to arrive at the future loss of applying the standard multiplier §1'I€ '[.i"iV'«::')§_t'_S{EA.':i}S€(Li to determine less ef depencieney}. We " V however note that in same eases, an appreciation of evidence and assessment, the ..z5'E'ribu:':a§ may find that percentage sf loss; of earning eapeeétjz 218 3 eeeuit ef the §~'.i'§Y'£'Ea£}€1"i§ dz'.-Sabiiiiy, a§§:}:*e>;§::1aée§}: the 38 {he peraterztage ef perzeéeszerzi ﬁiS'cibi§§'§'.}? in wiziel} cage, 9%? <;%ex::r':5~:a€; Elie '??ib:;:§ai '%i%'"i§ agieeé ﬁle egiej x'~'-.»/»»-.'.¢.,,,.V Vw,.w €....&_w&x «...,M manual iabourer, does not know any skilled work ether than masonary work, he has become unfit to..'dr§~..tEi.e same masenary xvork with the same efficiency' 1 = doing earlier to the accident. Therefore, V' justice would be met with if ;;~m§:;o;;e;::z* claimant is taken at 40% if 60% as eA1Va.;rn€§Vd"'by':his ° learned Cnunsel. it is not th'at"'che.vvVtnjured~ Claimant was earning pm. In fact;

loss of income calculated at this rate i;ern.ained unchallenged.

Thereffjfégv income of the claimant comes: $000 X 40% X 12 2 Rs, 19209/~} I1;._\;§.§e\'z;;_»cﬁfithe undisputed fact that the was age£i"'about 21 years as on the date of __.aeei£iient»,Lttne».ngnitiplier ta be adopted as per the ratio iai<§.__Vd0WnZtng,/Vt,he H0n'ble Supreme Court in the ease ef '~Sar1a Veéma 8: 0:5. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation ané 'x£L.u;ot'1;er repnrtaed in 2309 (6) Sci: 121 wetzid be ':81 if __t_j§1:ie anneal E9538 ef inenaxne :3? R5.i§§2§G/'~§s;$ nlnitipiieé by the tetfai tease at f::tt.1:'e inttnnae/retitéiéiien in ezzrrziizgg stgzpzzttitijg at the eéainzaﬁz; in t:e:°n3a at :nene§ 25 comes to Rs.3,45,600/~ as againat awarded by tbs Claims t;jibu:1 aij;

erzhancenient ta {he extent; (pf ..

same is rounded off to Rs.I';"?Vé';Q00/~V"%1TT1tii,jhélwaﬁfaéd as enhanced céompensatian under' Said head';-A In the result, thefirst--ragpvofxae-tita-:.§:1aimant herein shall be entitled' to f;Gia,1j:Vvefﬁ1a,;1r3é';i a:§'If1pensation of Rs' 138,009/Lia tlﬁj-'4V"f%'1i;C'5'«§""i't:)ss of enjoymant and tawards. loss of future earnings) at thci rate of 6% pa.

from thériatrég ofVgaée-%};tia3?;;«--__§;i'iE".the actual payment payable to hiﬁrxby tHVe'-appéliafxtinsurer within eight weeks from '1;hVeV"ofVV"th_e modiﬁed award.

Aftaiﬁ the said amount of compensation is T_depasitaz:i.._ by the i:1su:*<3r as afmesaid, ihe Claims V' 'f'I'x:i}'ana1 shall Cause a sum of Rs.§,5O,OOO/Q invested

-- F'i.xe& Deposit Ac€:0un':: in ihs aama 3f the Claimant nnééithozxi aziy N8;?;iC%§'I;Zi§S:3'd Saga «:2? his Chaica wéééz ciiraciéana to 'she iﬁamiiétr §'%7:a*g » ii} 319 aaia iiapzéaéé, sﬁaaié bs iiziéiaiéjg fa? a 3:25/":a:"§ae:§ 5}? ES }J€f:E,I"S 2/ma it aha}: be E°%ff_§"i€%'W'f3§ {%mW:>ﬁ @(éI¢"'?'."'/\'X_,O' , 36 Once in five years for further period dmfing his iife time,

(ii) interest shah be paid te the V' in a quarter, ._

(iii) he shaﬂ not be _perrhi:_teCi_ to said amount of erV__ahy 'paf=?€:'"ii'r'1'ei9eef "

nor shall he be p.efrnitted 1:9: raise ah}; loan thereon the.ijri_er"'permission of the Claims Balamie en.h*ari'.::ed eerrijiexxsation aleng with the interest total enhanced eompehsatioh'%'».§;h.ah.A b'e_' "pVai:i jio the claimant Award shall be 'feeciifieci terms.

The «presef:t"*'*appea1 filed by the insurer stands _dVispe=se'{£._ef"i;: {he above terms. Ne erder as to eosts in Eﬁfs ?§§$E as'; --

Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court

New India Assurance Co Ltd vs M Prabhu on 1 July, 2011

Equivalent citations: 2012 AAC 247 (KAR), 2011 (4) AIR KANT HCR 417, (2012) 2 TAC 104, (2012) 3 ACC 454, (2011) 6 KANT LJ 646, (2012) 4 ACJ 2391