Karnataka High Court
Chaluvaraju vs Mr Y Amar on 8 December, 2008
Author: Subhash B.Adi
Bench: Subhash B.Adi
!N THE HIGH COURT OF' KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE ._ DATES THIS THE em DAY cm DECEMBER 2908 BEFORE THE HOWBLE MRJUSTICE SUBQASH I-fa;'.4"v';;."l$.:I.:]_ «
BETWEEN 1 CHALAJVAPAJU sjo. £11-{ALUVARANGAIAH AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS « -
R/ATNO. :4/2--1,r:am< z,.e--csr(:z;1'--_ " ' VYITALANAGAR BANGALORE. V '~~;;,,1.3PPELLANr (B? gm: PVKALPAEfi;15§V.3 a :
1 Iv1RYAMA;R' "£2;
S/O.Y.1S.B.N_M7v'i_?TH'?.V . _' PLOT N(Z3,.£.?(;\6, VIJAYASOIJ I5E_~iA"APARTMENFS HKR4saHcnn.R0Am;?ATAwA¢wA VIJAYAWAM iI)IST.",_ ; »~ _ ANEHRAPRAEESH:{flfi00l
- _Ni"9TI{3~NAL gmsugauc-$30 LTD REGIGNAL <:;1<*;n}1cE
910.":-44; .SUBHA£IAM COMPLEX Rem " .
B.2;N$ALR2:>.E~ $50001.
._ .. ...RESPQNDEN'i'S % . jj;aayL 312;: M m1é12;sANAPpA,Anv. FOR R2) 1 _ _ =._"T'HIS'»,MFA IS FEED U/S 173(1} OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE LIUiZ!(§E';i&fi'E?SE'i' AIQD A\¥A}'€iZ> DATES 07.12.2006 PASSED IN MVC " '=NO--.823%3{2005 ON THE. FILE OF' XVI ADDITIONAL JUDGE, MEMBER, , BANGALORE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETWION FOR CC'-.M?ENSATION ANS SEEKING ENHANCEMENT FOR ' L' f Q '*c:<}rgmtNsA'r*:ora.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FGR ORDERS THIS BAY, THE GOURT DEIJVEREID THE F'0iJ..C3WINGt ggscmnius % APPE& X Jilgfigfififij Though there is a delay of I 14 days, no objections are. Considering the cause shown. delay is condoned, is" . up for final disposal.
2. This is. claimanfs appeal compensation. Claimant $ufi'ered' V__gI'iev01is~ accident that took place on isihsteieflti the ciaixnant and another were however, due to the rash and neg]ige13.tvdrivit1;'; lorry bearing N<;.!§P~ 15m*--'zs2 1, both the claimant and vigxievous injury.
3. of the driver of the Ion};
am not in disspi;{te.._' sufiezed by the claimant is
-- summary shows that the clmmant both bones of right beg middle 1/3rd, he was §;2;'};1.2005 and he underwent an operation on i'ié.i1.2ooE3. aim' regard, PW~2 -- doctor has also deposed , that there is tenderness and swelling at the die right Ieg with fracture both the bones of right leg 'V3;iz3'i§ii¥.ie--..':3rd and smaii abrasion over the medial maileoli about 2 x Further stated that. he was discharged on 3.12.2005. A3 'finer the doctor's evidence, claimant has sufiered 30% disability to Jy RS.1S;*3_Gé~j_,':i ii and nouiishmcnt -- Rs.IO,GO0/-- and :iIi§s.25.000/ --. In all, ciaimant is enfitled for against Rs.80,{}00/- awarded by the Tribunal iraiemst per axmum on the cnhézaccc! cempensation from of petition till payment. Claimant is not entitled for for the delayed period of 1 14 days. gvks' -3- the lower limb and 10% to the whole 'body. Tribune} considering the evidence has granted compensation of Rs.80,0{)0/--. as loss of future income is concerned. claimant has "
the eross--examination that he has not been remC+V¢€}__ and he ccuitinues to be in employment. the Tribunal has not granteé any C0II1I}{'3I}Sa1j()i':I'1~_{):I:1.%_tit"1€ tof ioeaiibf ii future income. V . i ii
4. It is not in }:i;as":iufi'e1'ed fracture of both bones of there is disability of 10%. It claimant was inpatient and ifiliansidexing the same. compensation to be modified as under:
Pain and ui=s=1__1'fi'eriiig_ lA.§g..:';?5;0co;--; bss of income during laicifup *-- Rae}?-.i)}fi}O] medical expenses --- Rs.4G.OOO/--. which' -fiieidental cost; loss of future amenities -
-4.
The appal is partly albweti accordingly. Sd/*9 Iudgé KNM/ ~