Karnataka High Court
North West Karnataka Road Transport ... vs Siddappa Devappa Achanur on 12 June, 2008
Author: Manjula Chellur
Bench: Manjula Chellur
IN THE H%GH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE V.
amen was THE 12"' my or JUNE 2008
PRESENT:
me mums MRS.JUST!CE MANJULA4 % %
THE HONBLE MR.Jus'nc.=_ K.N.KEs2;AvAu-sARA~kAs§A " " X
M1-'.A.:\io,Qg I A
1 NORTH WEST A
BELGAUM :>tvI.%?'=.=.I0§s4%.%k f '
BELGAUM.
BYJTS oIwsaoNm,conmeu£R,L A
REP.8Y_:T%¢,HI*E:= LimOFFe9.ER_~
2 NORTH WEST KAa%T:s:A1*A:<A_RoAo
TRANSPORT CORPORA'fi€}N»»..
GOKULROAD. k
Huau av !TS~VMANA§33N'~G DIRECTOR.
ae:=,;%av nfs cnies LAW OFFICER. APPELLANTS
msmg ; R Aw.)
7.$1 ; s:o£>A:éPAnévm=A ACHANUR
. % ~ . _ 'AGED ABGUT 32 YEARS,
R 'AT mp POST. HALA<;A'r'r:.
"TC'é;..Rfi;MADURGA.
Di$T; BELGAUM RESPGNGENT
A % vwoo PRASAD FOR CAVEATOR FOR Respomc-2N1')
f
I F F
&§.T.W§§.1i~1;
SEDDAPPA MVAPPA ACHANURAGED
AEGJT 32 YEARS
OCCUPATION: WEAVER (POWER Low) é
NOWNOL,AT&POST:HALAGATIl, j %
RAMDURG TALUK, 'A , _
BELGAUM msmacr. ..;APPELLANTA %
(By smmoo PRASAD &'SRl.SRlN1VAS)5..: D";€35, ADv$,)*
1 THE MANAGING DiRECTOR
KARNATAKASTATEVR0Ai'J""'»."A % a
Moog
CENTRAL oFF|cEsv, = _ % ~
BANGALQRE 560 :_:2:r%5¢ A
2 THE --MANA£3N€;-3 DiR£CTOR.
INTERNAL nmsuamce FUND, K.S.R.T.C.,
- _K.H.;_E3{}LIBLE_ ROAD; as-eaummaa,
cgN'rRAL;oFi=;c£s,
027, RESPONDENTS
' sué r !5.\'iJ.§Yfi§V«'i§Uh.4AR, mu.) Q IS FiLED UIS 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST " Juoemem AND AWARD DATED: 12.4.2005 PASSED IN we .1 -N£V3.Z0.,7'i ON THE FILE OF THE ONE. JUDGE ($R.DN.) 8:
'-ME--MBEH., AD9l..MACT. SAUNDATTL AWARDNG COMPENSAT!®l ' ' V ..QF..RS.¥$333;0OW-- WITH FUTURE NTEREST AT 8% PA. T V' NO.6088f05 ls FILEB UIS 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE 'JU{}GMENT AND AWARD DATED: 124.20% PASSED IN MVC "'N<§.2o71/2091 on THE FILE OF THE cm. JU£)GE (SR.DN.) a. MEMBER, ADDLMACT, SAUNDATTI, PARTLY ALLOWWG THE CLAN / PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AMI) SEEKING COMPENSATION. _ j mesa M.F.A8. ARE COMING on FOR HEARENG. i COURT mus DAY. MANJULA cusiitzfiw 4., I2=f4ELl_\{E-RED' FOLLOVWNGZ Siace M.F.A.No.7281!2005 is "fine corpoi * iiiei-in Eiigiikiénging A the quantum of compensation .a'vi'.aArm"by' Ffribunal' several heads, M.i==.A.No.sos8i2oo5 is aw being satisfied" by the quantum of so far as toss of future income pertaéi1ifig._Vii§v- tiiié ciqncerned by taking into considerafion 'é§__his incomv V V e.
2. We have 'riaaidaie for win the parties and have througifi records fiie Tiihunai a well.
Bifi accident on 14.1.2000 at about 2.30 hours on i,_,g',avano<$t Road, while the injured was traversing in KSRTC _ :18y§ 'b§ming"hb. i_<A.29.I=.4a2 from aangaiore -- Bmiicot is not senousiy c The finding of the Tribunal that the accident was due to rash driving of the KSRTC Bus by its driver. is based on the ' V . "on record and does not call for intetference. ,/ 4
4. Coming to me question of quantum of compensation by we Tribunal. we have Ehe maxim! records before us apaftt*f£0::0: _ evidence of two Doctors i.e.. P.W.3 and P.W.4. document pertaining to the injuries susaainegijA§n0'0ae«0§ns0ai0%o taken by the appenant injured is at Ex.P_.4_i'ssuod S:o:§iof'S§boo§:0Iis§: % of Dish' ict Hospitai. Gadag. As per this backg' "round. $210 seen at District Hospital at Gadag with §ha_'_fo£kMiijg awees notiood'cii'rfi0ai|y:
"Muktipie contusions she and shape. Red in colour; . Swelling The §9*:{Ii&1s Hubii for farm: renew up. As it was whatever happens at KIMS.
I-Iubli had tojbo remg book £0,010 Hospital, Bidar and the same be wo£md------oorfificate. Ex.P.5 is the wound certificate 09': :<.:ms0j'H®§i0g1 dated 13.1.2001. He wm in me Hospital L0V00o»o00_;a;meen0js;12;2000%tok2.1.2001. The x-ray dated 16.12.2000 boarim _ .ts_lo.40_11 fi1oug5'ro§oaIed erect abdomen. but no abnormality was notiow. ,: . vx4Vray..l§jo.Vi' datw 1.1.2001 is ooncomed, flue fracmre of right clavicte "-\_\j'\\' aiso fracture of 3'" 4"' and 5"' ribs on the right side pleura:
v V . _ seen. Though he patient was seen by the Doctor at Distréct at Bidar Of! 14.'i2.29% and was inpatient if'! KIMS Hospital. Hlibli 16.12.2000 tit! 2.1.2901. no one seems to havo noficed the right 4/ 5 ciavicie fracture and so also the fractures of 3'", 4"' and 5"' ribs. In ali probabiiity,fi1ey were concentrating on me erect abdomen rather thantixe clavicle and rib fracture. Though he was inpatient 16.12.2000 and to 2.1.2001.H1e may of the chest was takentin Therefore. these fracturee have to be coninumede e hi,' it a question and not anything else. So far as obtained from the deparnnent of surgerg-v_,:v"i£.{MS they also refer to right clavicle trecture aAndVV'eiso'Vb;lunt.injuryAtevv causing spieenic rupture.
5. The argumentefglfflwe KSRTC is that initially medical diegirieeierei did not reveal any of these fractzxree er sustaining any biunt injury to spimn cannot be taicen What we noticed from Exe.P.
4. 5 and 6 iejexeept at Gadag. they did net take X» rey_et'eng the the injured and they have referred him te The very fact that the patient was referred to h_:""i(iMS at would oniy indicate that they were not able to * ~ the" abdomen (distension) of the injured. in betwm 'j«t4.12;2'o."se e;16.12.2000, there is nothing on record to show that there other cause for distensiert at the abdomen or fracture of right 4: or right rib. Therefore, as the Distict Hospitai Doctors were not / 6 able to manage me injuries, the paiient was sent to KMS At KIMS Hospitai, not only the Orthopedic Unit attendeefteij.the.:'injured~ even me surgety deperhnent had to attend distinction of the abdomen. On the very samedey refened to surgical unit. As per the examinatien., V conscious. He had already diagneeed fer"fu"eetz.:'re-of righfciavicie and on clinical examination presence for which he underwent expioratory" 4Leperot{;:V'nyi under general anesthesia. The fluidhagi égsiieg have to be started immediately. 11.2001. The injured was nafive of Ramiavdurgax ;fe'i:;E§». and according to him, he was working as 'weevef has the accident and the accident oceurred yvher: he have from Bangalore to Bagalkot on eii as he belongs to ma! part of Kamataka he a piece nearer to his native place. which is .~ ~ A * Thenveeming to the question of consequence of the injuries injured in the accident' and the disabiiities with which he V. suffering through out his life. we have the evidence of two . who are P.W.3-General Surgeon and P.W.4--~is an 0rfl1o&ic surgeon. Though P.W.4 is not a Doctor who treated the injured at Gadag, . La '2 but he is the one who examined the injured and five assessment of the disability so far as right upper arm and left side of the chest is In other words based on the medicai records and V. 11.3.2002, he issues dwe disability certificate. According to more was a fracture of right clavicio and 3'". :4"'"'a:sd K V' side. His examination revealed more was iriiizljé .' third shaft of the right clavicle bone. Fra§ot;:iFa..V.of ii"? ~aifi€i:V'_l.'5'l*':._i'iir»s...i:'i mg "
right side of the chest. There is ovtljiolgeniogj and bony irteguiarity in the above of ma! union through me clinical and Eooause of these deficits. the limb on the shoulder etc. wmu he disabiiity of 30% of the right shoulder joiniio Iimb. The cross-examination of this bad of me eariier treaonent though he hao'--seoi1V'Exs.P_.+:i~o;2d:"i?.,5. We do not find any distorted version in me V do_;;;oss..§xal$iena{i§:il;sia§i§'Doctor. Then coming to the evidence of P.W.4 -- V'77yrho*Vis a hféonéralhéurgoon but not the Doctor who did exploratory Sploneotomy on the iniorod. but he says further given by him like for gaesho-instastana-I diseases. Acoording to this Doctor. on account of formation of keioid due to the patient moods life long antibiooc' or immunisation' . 5;
/ 8 Theugh the camplaint of the patient was ¢escornto:t and inabflity %§Véb_";«a:fiy4 kind of iaborious work. the Doctor does not specifically was the consequence of this keloid formation s<3~fa,r__ ag; K "
of the injuted is concerned.
7. warm this evidenm and :ne 53-: of ' A evidence of the Doctors P.ws, and erg the two Doctors who treated the mam and onhopedic department were not exgméryw. ffhaa examined before me Court were flag of the injured based on me injaféci and atso medical records apart from clinicafi Var'tdA 'agaminafion made by mm. Neither of me two Doctars ha4f~iaV_:'givu§n any%%¢m-mm disability in relation to wmmg eagacm banged disabiiity suffered by the appeaant. Howext_er%.kA«itieT%'f:i:§u:ss.:.:&%sins into consideration 30% disabiiity givm by *%.9.w.3 and 30% disabiiity offered by P_w.4 - a . . §?;_en'er§i Su@§n;_ homes to the conchssior: that there is ices of future in order to arrive at mat reasoning either fize Doctors Rm details of funcfionai disability in relation to earning \m or the funcfionai disability emainea by Gm Doctors must fixafsuade any pmdent person $0 some to such oonclwion. in other words, the Tribunal ms to exemise its judickms mind like any other prudent or 9 normai thinldnsg person in me absw of specific detaii in V. That apart, if the injured comes up with a c£aim pefition loss of income on the ground that he was nqi fibia t9 V' avocation he was doing prior to» the accidecxtlhr capacity due to the permanent disabiiity; is; an " L' what was the avocafion he fi6w..t£'se §disabiifty complamed of suffered by way of his earning wupacity. This is how assessmenfef be arrived a
3. with 'ab§-kg through the records and am! evidence v6f_tf:e'_ drai evidence, we do not rave whatsoever regar<iistgi2aeVVVVa.r;t:.E -fil of me injured. on the oflaer h av.nd,_the produced Mfore us 53.9.11 and 9.14 Surgeon and ammo: by me General Surgeon reape¢£hu§§9,%«u§'e§"¢%asurme% dated 14.3.2002 issued by the orthopedic af'Ex.F--3 .11,"il1e oocupafion of me injured is shown as 'nii' and in % dam 14.8.2004 issmd by the Genarat Surgeon describes accaxpafibn as a weaver over a power loom. The accident occurred in V mber. l3r.Anagol gives certrficat' 9 dated 14.3.2002 showing "--«V. §'<:c&pa§on as ' nit '. The hospimi records rem: his occupation as nil and 'in oeramte dated 14.3.2004 issued after 29; yeats the oocupafion is if} shown as weaver over power loom now nil. In an probabilitiw. have joined the power loom after 2064. In that event, we of income based on the claim of the appeliarrt; rnjureri' u 'A weaver as on the date of the accident and hie-'rm;-L should proceed to assws the compensatioorr__oase d fire V , U5.
9. The counsel for the epoeiierrt Vappeltent was a weaver on the power ]oorrr._ncw:_' am he was a weaver over power now in a power room.
In order to ;of_ be some evidence to show as a weaver how much the appellant was earning and who' said power loom and what exactly his of weaver. He does not examine the Doctor e-re:Wrr?rbi§%rrarf'ro._say the apperrant injured would be abie to conririue or not. From any angle if we look into the T' on rer,or-flgfwe are not convinced of the evocation of the injured "':ei$'s~!eever even if for a moment we prmume he was a weaver in me evidence of rho Doctor do not convince us mat he was do mat work any more with the so called disability of 30% as M
10. Evidence of the doctor does not convince us thal'ih4e¢5_ras unable to do work as efficiehtly as before, if not as a e«fea\:'er' _ to do some work for his living. Therefore, in of --. record supporfing the fact of evocation of jin§ared.'ae'a..a~1eayeru,' we shall take his evocation or §ive£ihood'as"e cooiie;"'.l. é:a<pl'ain'ed'*~ *' by both the General Surgeon and""()T§thopedic Surgeonikyewlhave to V now see even to do the of dieebililies he has suffered, whether he would he 100% efficiency' Evidence of Gene{ai':Surgeeh he would have to take of the callus formation on the $pieer::"~~i.vi.' ll iii; ffhen --$h:eIn'ovement of the right shoulder. the abdication and lii1e,r'c-taiti'-:>:1V""e"l'f':oiency of the right shoulder joint is de'finiieiy.lirrapairedllbecause of the restrictions. in the absence of evidence regarding me functional disability in relation io earning capacity we are of the opinion it is just and prooer..toA.1tal(fie his disability at 10% which hampers his earning .. The accident occurred in the year 2000. if he were to hwoikliin a place like Bangalore, even an ordinary coolie in a power ' Vi' would not have earned less than R5300!» per day. Therefore.
. _ ..... ..\ and attendant charges
we mnnot assess toss of future income of the iniured beyon<i___tG'i6 of his earnings.
12. So far as loss of amenities and permanent:
shortening of span of life, though ti1eg6o'ctor.has in so many words me distension problem the lilies' the uncomfortable feeling to am?' ieborious and consequences of constant. intake---ol?"L'vsniiah.ioties ' weenie? definitely come in the way of enjo§is;lent":;f fhiis '4 any other normal person. Howeverflthe qt:-e'htLi:n; awarded by the Tribunai uncle-r etnfieatslto eakéessive. in View of the above reesoniitnagii-siigl me opinion the following amounts wolildee compensation under general and special ctamégestl
(a) iri,'a.:r=g1_pair'i"a.°n<:l su.§feringi': it Re. 75.0fl0;.
of lifeand shortening life span 60.09%-
10,000!-
(d)lC9nveyariéei nourishszent "and: other incidental charges 10.0901'- ' {e 'Less of income at the rate of Rsfimfl per month for five months during the laid up period 1 5,0001-