Sri K Selvam S/O Kannan vs Sri V Shashidhara on 8 June, 2011

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sri K Selvam S/O Kannan vs Sri V Shashidhara on 8 June, 2011

Bench: K.L.Manjunath, H.S.Kempanna

3 MFA 4815fG6

YESHXVANTHAPURA,
BANGALOREWBGO O22. ... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRLM. NARAYANAPPA, ADV. FOR R2.

R1 NOTICE DESPENSED WITH v.c.0 'DTD, 19.   A' 

THIS MFA FILED U/S3 1'?3(1} OF MV Aef:f..Aj§;Av1:*~é.:3fr.¢_T:%i13:J  ' 
JUDGMENT AND AWIURD DATE:>;:Ji/1'C;2C--.Q5.;«§AS.;"3E137< IN;
Mvc N0.484e/2:304 ON THE; FILE, c;iF*~"THE
JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL .<:fAI_;sE:S'A.;3:" Me:«1e.1;1§,_:
METROPOLITAN AREA, BANGAL{§)RE {se_e'H{i=0)§v_ PARTLY V

ALLOWING THE CLAIM H9:frIT1<;>N*':§::R"<:AQMPi:NvsATi0N AND
SEEKING ENHANCEMENT .0? .coN::»p:eN=SM'1QN.

THIS MF;:»'eVQN1IN;e €01'?  THIS DAY,
KEMPANNA. 92;' f3Ii:L::E.\ﬁE'j,I?ZE1_).¢_ffI#1_E -m.LLQxN1NG:
 """   
Thi é a'p'pea1:   seeking for enhancement

of the compeneationiriyrespect of the personal injuries which

«whe h$:s5'.:.s1;e1aineci: "ii':.a___:nr;t0r accident that took lace on 11~06~

 at  p.m. near Railway Gate. Old Byappanahaﬁi

sietxéiteziVV;:§:;'_"31€:iT:;.1/Iadras Read inveieving 'the auto rickshaw

*VbeariNLg  Q4 4885 evened' by Responﬁent Neg} and

x V'  é3j1su<:"eei with Respendent N92 at the reievam point ef time.

/9"
))_,..w''

%'';W,,-



4 MFA i5;'O6

exgenges, Rs.8,0G8/- towards camfeyance and I:9:1V:'i§i*;r%;;§ix:,

Rs.12,C3{)0/- tawards 1:333 of incame during laid   "

takixlg the iI1C{)ﬁ1€ at Rs.3,f}80;'-- ~-- V;:i:%%_a:°<§-<3;  '

future £653 of magma. Ehus, in all a sztxmféi"

iaierest 31: 6% pa. fmm the __€:iajte 0f'v~p:€i§t:9'§§."  of- 

realizatian. Ii further saclgiieci 'f,h{f"3__.:€Vv}V':'§{?i1"t3~w_Vﬁab§:ii}?'_ ﬁgf pfégrrnerzt of

campensaiien on Resp0rid'ef{£ N442  
3. The appeiiani/Claimaritt' b.3iﬁg.j_'.:V.aggrieVed by the

quantum of c0I:3§};>e:v*.t3j:§f.43:.i:icsr;§_'is  {his Court.

4. Lx3é.1':§%~'*?€{:¢_   ff g{§pea:'ing for the
app€BantjC1£*?:ﬁ'§aj£i*€: :§§f{:3hﬁﬁéiéa  Tribunai has erred in
not aWa%'d'ing" wﬁﬁlpensation under all heads,

despite thé"  é1:1i1:i9ia1{t.'. 'h:$§Vihg }Z>L';1C€:d ciinching evidence

 V. 5upp{:§j£ingf~Wit}1 éicscumen is and hence, a. case fer enhancement

*._is made: <:_>i:vtf , 

-- '  _  Aéorztrag 1:116 learned casings} for ihe respendentg

 'Vggppsﬁaci 'éihé ﬂnpugnaé judgmeni and awaré passed ﬁy ihe

" = ' »'}_':*i1;>i:§iai,

9;;//'/f



6 IVIFA 4815/O6

Hospital The fractures were set right by fixing plates and

screws. He has further stated ihai the C18.iI§T;3if:}"i'..""'}i18.S

permanent funeiienal disabiiiety of his right hmb t<_;_;'éi1'  _

64% and to an extent of 34% to the whcsie 2. 

taking these aspects into e0né;idera::i::h"._ $1.33.. 'avafarderi

R$.65,000/~ towards injury, pain and"s_uffering;,v'Tiitve SaIj]';1€ if1"\>

our View is just; and prosper  ém€:'i' does"*.:1dt*':caI1;: for any

modification.

9. Fur*d'1er.., _ ihefi   Rs.20,G0O/ ~
towarels loss .    adverted to the
nature and V' of  {hat the claimant has
sustaineié  i.n_mVHeonsideration, as he has to
suffer dise'b§li':y  in future also, we deem it

propergts xgrauIit..,e.'f1:'rt1i'er  of Rs.5.00G_/~ in additicm to

  Rs,2€:e;(;):'C)(93";'~   awafcVi'e'd v by the Tribunal towards loss of

uam'e;j1ii:ies_§V--.V_ " VV

 .F'a;rther, the Tribunai has awarded Rs.6,800,/~

"each.«__ towards medical expenses and conveyance and

 e.{:Ci:if:'eEin1eni and atiendani charges: The aeeiéen: has taken

 an %1.§,2(}{}4;  €'Ji€Ti€'I1<T:€ en record reveaés 2123": :he



7 MFA 4815/O6
claimant has taken treatment in the Hospiial fer a period of

one mohth. Having regard te the nature of fracture that. _h-e h.gz.s

eustained. we are ef the View that the eiaimaxiﬂn1iisf;"'----heb;<e'.

taken feliow up treatment after hie diseharge';'»teh*a,i;'"~i.h'iuzjh

fellows that he must have spent eeneiderahie

medical expenses and 21130 e<3::Veyahee','-- notgrielérheni and 

attendant charges. Taking all iheuseriectore "ir1t:<u)" e'ene§.derati0n,

we deem it fit and pfoper  fuefhe} sum of
Rs.1€lO0O/- in addition to / under each of

these heads.

11. The Iiieraijg q1ie'sii6ri_'thuei"th dvéjells for em' Consideration
is determihatiefxef _aiI:3e0me"'af the Claimant and Compensation
to be awarded t0we11*d.:s'V_1O'.~:,s_ 'efV*"ineome during laid up period.

The elaimantahiiz_:hie.eViéiehee has Claimed that he is aged 28

'years end, was Ceti'tefing Worker by oeeupation earning

 accident has taken place on £1»-O6~2004.

Ashseial, i_h';-elceise Qf this nature, the eiaimanfg has he: placed

 'any subeiahiive nmteriai in support cf his claim in respect of

 I  ihfeerhe of Rs.8,000/~ perm. The Tribunai in the absence ef

'~?'i;he'§se:H:1e haze de':.em1ine<:} the ineeme at Re.3,§€}O,/» pm. In ear

5/».



8 MFA 4815,/06
view, taking the occupation of the Claimant ae Ceritering

market', he would have atleast earned 

aeeerdingly, we determine the same as his "'«i;{l1<:dmel  V'

Claimant has suffered eommir1u'£;ed liraeture Cf h.i.s_lri;:gh1 'femur:

and also fracture ef both bones ef right  'Fael{1::1g'~t.hls 

into consideration, we are of theﬁriew that__tl'1eVA C'laif:1aht Could V'

not have attended to his nQ.rmal'VAx*v*~<:l1li\:~fe»i*-lleurlrh0;11f.hs: which is
also righty taken by the  u the same into
consideration, we_a're of   has to be
compensated;  the said period.
Having   ~ per month, for
four mohl;hs._,  -he entitled to Rs.l6,000/« as

against Re;l.2l,O0O/7  the Tribunal towards loss of

income: during laid ufj period.

-___l'2. _ The next 'question that dwells for our Consideration

lie' lesls'VQl"v-flihilltejlincome. We have already held the income of

theAellalmahtl:aft'?Rs.4,{}C!O/« pm. The claimant was aged 28

 ' 'years. 1:3':-¢r§:~e, the rrzulifplier that beeemes applicable in View

 has been held by {he Apex Ceuri: in Sarla 'v'ar;ma'e ease

'~55 Al?'  no'; l6 as applied by the 'frihunzzll The evidence ef

,/"'





9 ''..l:.lVIFA " 
PW..2 the Medical Qlficer reveals  th_e""w:l.:§imé;m'--_h:1s 

pem1anent functional disability of right lower limbl_le_ é1n've§:5ie:1i}

of 54%. Though the Medical Qlffiéeer li--:<1.Sl'[email protected]£llé3;t2he': 

permanent disability t0 the whellee».Vl:.5er1y a{'Tribur1al

has taken the same at 2O%~w..'_VR7e_«"Clb  fVilrll1d« any jlistilfication to

differ with the percentage ofl.'.:2C)% taken by the

Tribunal and x§ze'«aer:epl;_  the same into
Considerationi; 4"xve"---a..fe'3¥:gfjxEie3xf_th:itV.{he claimant would be

entitled to~Rs..;i';;3e;§;e9./:--.(Rs;4l,o'o0V.;<i 12 X 17 X 20/lOO} as
againet   by the Tribunal towards future

loes of inc0l::;e,ll All1={V)!l§l»3' view, the appellant claimant is

_ entitleglio e<3r1haI1"(,e._lc_lleompensation of Rs.-40,000/~ with interest

  89/_6l pal' date of petition till the date of realizatiens

[pass 'able. fel.l0§x;ing:

j;ll1eAlj'a{§pea1 has to succeed in part.
K In ':he":Fes.ei1lt, for the foregoing reasons, we proceed to
ORDER

H v be appeal is alloweel in part.

The impugneei judgmem: and award paeeeé by ihe "--.ﬁT':'§{b:;§:al is mezliﬁecl and the appellaﬁtfelaimané is awerdeel la /' enhanced <:<m1per:sati0n of Rs.»i£O,C=OO/ ~ with in:¢:§3':3.: £§1J{,'V.V6O/{B p.a~. ' frsm the date of petitian '£111 realizaiiogi. ' .. The s€cond respondent insufsr ~ 'ap'peéil..V'"'--sH;é;ii deposit the entire enhanced cofrips-.}j1sati{>r1 V*v'it1'1 i_Y1'[r':%IGv'$J£ Vh€'fOI'€'. ' the jurisdictional Tribunafl wu€ek.:§' date of receipt of copy 0fjudgmeVniTé;r1_d .

Having regard ta    cf enhanced
compensation,    entire enhanced

amount with v¢r_1é'v;app'e1lant. Sdfw EEEEGE saw?

% %     Egggg

 JL

Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court

Sri K Selvam S/O Kannan vs Sri V Shashidhara on 8 June, 2011

Bench: K.L.Manjunath, H.S.Kempanna