Karnataka High Court
Ramanna S/O Hanumantappa Surapur vs Ramesh on 17 July, 2009
Author: H.N.Nagamohan Das
Bench: H.N.Nagamohan Das
1
in THE HIGH coum' or KARNATAXA,'
cmcurr BENCH AT DHARWA}_).__ ' V'
rwmn THIS mm 17'"! DAY or 2909: 2 ~ H
mm aorrnm MR. J{Is T!C.€A$'A.§lA(§'§19g'_.11§§O!-EAisE:"B;€T£'8._VV
M.F.A. rm.
nmwsmn: ' % " [
RAMANNA " _
S/C) HANUMANTAP?A._$LtRAPuR,-' ' ;, ..
AGE: 42 YEARS, _' _ -
occ; 1i)RItfERj:1JN0w':--NIL, "
R] :)"§&'"EARf?wA;f*:j€§R §*A_:§i<:, H
MA%g1AvEB:.R'~ R'0_AD_, .,
BAG,AL1<:0T.. _ 3 _ ..APPELLAN'l'
(By sR;L."'N.V%sHA--Ni<;§R~~--}éAwGARE..}I, Ami.)
.....
A V' f_ 1; _ 1;*.A n%.:E::~§i41~~% . S/"Q_r4,..NARAYAzmKAR, " " AGE; YEARS, LL;
'BUSINESS, R[AT 4"' MAIN, NAGAR, SAPFAPUR, DHARWAD.
.9 THE mvxsromg MANAGER, NEW INDIA ASSURANCE rgoxm, P.B.R{)AD, DHARWAD.
RESPQNBENTS (By SR1 I}.B. KALLANGGUDAR, A£)V. FOR R2 Sfli 8.8. SEETHARAMA RAG, ADVCR2) mss MFA IS F'iLE¥3 UNDER sECr1QN...i?3'_@) 'a'§p ?;':«i£;..._ M.V, ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT Mb" AiihfARD_' .1;>s;:*E:L>_ 27~4~2oo? IN MVC NG.135/2005 PASSEED B'1'._Ti{I:'-.__M;A.(§.T.*.___ "
NOII, BAGALKOT AND PRAYINAQ i?'fC}§é EN.1»:A1s;t:E:2;1':3:§*:'.iQF COMPENSATION, "
THIS APPEAL ..COMIEH"(3;.. _'GN"-»_F€IRA"AI')ME;§3SiON THIS BAY, THE COURT I}.,E_'i:;¥VE-3REi.E"_'¥V"1';'..iFQLLOWING:
bciingg V» the inadsiquacy of coifiifiéfiéaiiqn b:g: VVt}3c Mater Accident Ciazm" s Tx--;t; u»:;é: 'm_ dated 27.04.2007 in we :§g,V1:35j'{:5V_'is»be.ro:x: tiiig Court, fi,_ Cm..1:he date of accident, petitioner was a driver ' a:;d._V'he a=%fisM.._aged about 40 years ané his monthly eanfing " -. The evidence of d0<:tor--P,W'.5 éiscloses £1;ai"va§pj§{§l]an£ sustsjneé the fcsiiewirtg injuxicsz "E. Biuzfi; injury on head.
2. Biunt injury on chest and abeiemen. }' ;_ /tflflmf, 3
3. injury on left hip.
4. Fracture of right femur segmental tibiofibula joint S "
5. Fracture of clavicie right M/3 ' _
6. Fracture of rib sré, 4m r;ght.ch¢§,'t.%'
3. The doctor fi1rthé1:'"M'deg;o';3cs.;« AV cannot do routine work, hand w€5r}(b,:'-s.__t;.;Luat»tig:.\:v';1, Wé;iiC' a sfick and to drive. The dfiétgr dpin¢ti* éppcfléint sustained 50'/o pc:mxancnt"di§:ab'iVE!y to 16%': lower iimb and 30% to the Whoié ifrifififial Without properly evidence on record coxfimitted oniy granfing Rs.40,()()0/-- as <;cxmpe1i'é*.:a2t}:.O11..1inc:1§crVf1ie heading loss of future earning. E V' .4: "It is.__scf£t1ed. yosifion of law that the injured is not ' " for physical disability but for fimcfionak The Court is mquimd to examine the inability to lead a full life, inability to AA ' L--~I:3*,&1:1_j<:'v,>sVj;* the amemfies and inability to earn as he used {£3 (3€!I'I1. A Division Bench caf this Court in the case of NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD. --v$- ': xx PAPAMMA AND ANOTHER reported in 2007 %;:31;jgg;§1 the case of K. NARASIMHA MURTHY --~v:::e ' 1_'_'1'rV£E3' 3§§A.NAG'ER;'%%»M.L M/S ORIENTAL INSURANCE cgio. 41'_,f'1f'13,.Q_TBAAMiALO[R'E_AgN3 F ANOTHER reported in IL}? 24'?. I;.'1:1'ei{1 not the age and physica} ififo consideration, it is the injury which requires instant case, the appellant dr:§Aye3t;b accident. Having regard by the appeflant, mg 'fihefiibunaz thai the appellant <:e2z1:V1é.e¢3t':('fl0V Therefore, the funcfional €1isabil;ViLty. o'f is to be taken at 50%. The wéié' about 40 yams on the date: of accident ' " ]Z'E111}§if}1ii£t1' is 15. The appcllant in his pcfiiion " . n has he was getting monthiy salary sf Rs.3,{}00]- baifa of Rs.155/-. In the circmastanccs, the x 'T is entitled far compensation undar the heading 'fjtlture iess Of income at Rs.3,50{} x 12 x 15 x 50 m 123.3, 35,306]- 100 '='.f-\'71\\"z
5. The compensation awarcleti by tht: on
-zather heads is just and reasonable and the far interference.
6. For the reasons staicd £:_.LFt:v<.*».é}c,A
i) The appeéi. partly' ii] T'iife~~.i;33pfq1§_ét}V'§aj.*2§éi.*:i datséfi 2'?.o4.2oo7 in 4V1V'Ex»1fj.:v\'a'«.V.:'{_'v3.N;#L.'ié$}2O95 is hereby modified V compensation to Rs.4,6(),700/ -- fies ofRs.1,85,'.7OO/-.
A "" "Remaining afl other aspects, the impugxcci award remains intact and undisturbed. 3 ' " iv) Ordered accordingly.
sa/«L EDGE