High CourtsSingle Bench(2005) 09 KAR CK 0031

North West Karnataka Road Transport Corporation vs Dundappa Ramappa Rakshi since deceased by his L.Rs.

Karnataka High Court · Decided on 9 September 2005 · Citation: (2006) ACJ 2100

HON’BLE JUDGES
K. Sreedhar Rao, J
CASE NUMBER
M.F.A. No. 4772 of 2002

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

4 paragraphs · 387 words

K. Sreedhar Rao, J.—Petitioner in M.V.C. No. 1283 of 1995 sustained crush injury in the middle of the left leg in the motor vehicle accident. Petitioner took treatment at Ramdurg Hospital and at the K.M.C. Hospital, Hubli. Petitioner was an inpatient for about a month and continued treatment as an outpatient. Petitioner died during the pendency of the petition. His legal representatives have been brought on record. Accident occurred on 18.3.1995. The petitioner died on 13.10.1997. On the basis of the evidence of the homoeopathy doctor, PW 3, the Tribunal holds that the death is on account of injuries sustained in the accident and awarded compensation of Rs. 82,000 with interest at 9 per cent from the date of petition till the date of payment. The K.S.R.T.C. is in appeal.

2.

The finding of the Claims Tribunal that death is on account of the injuries sustained in the accident only on the basis of oral evidence of homoeopathic doctor is untenable. There is no evidence to show that petitioner suffered chronic injuries, the cause of death is not forthcoming. Death occurred almost 2 1/2 years after the accident. The Full Bench of this Court in Kannamma Vs. Deputy General Manager, and Uttam Kumar (Deceased) Vs. Madhav and Another, . has held that if a person injured in a motor vehicle accident dies for the reasons other than the injuries caused in the accident, the legal representatives are entitled to claim compensation to the extent of loss to estate and not towards loss of dependency and other general damages. The medical expenses and loss of income during treatment would constitute loss to estate.

3.

Keeping in view the nature of injuries and the period of treatment taken by the petitioner, it is reasonable to award Rs. 25,000 towards medical expenses and incidental charges relating to treatment. The petitioner was laid-up for about four months on account of the injuries. Therefore, a sum of Rs. 6,000 is to be awarded towards loss of earnings during laid-up period. In all, the legal representatives of the deceased the petitioner are entitled to Rs. 31,000 with interest at 6 per cent from the date of petition till date of payment as against Rs. 82,000 awarded by the Claims Tribunal.

4.

The amount in deposit to be transferred to the Tribunal for payment.