High CourtsDivision Bench(2011) 09 KAR CK 0009

Sri Anthony Raj vs The President, Federation of Karnataka Lorry Owner Association and The Divisional Manager Orietnalin Insurance Company Ltd.

Karnataka High Court · Decided on 21 September 2011

HON’BLE JUDGES
K.L. Manjuhath, J · B. Manohar, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
M.F.A. No. 3521 of 2007 (MV)

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 · 401 words

K.L. Manjuhath, J.—In a road traffic accident occurred on 19.3.2005 Petitioner sustained fracture of both bones middle 1/3rd of right leg and dislocation of right hip and fracture of dislocation of right, forearm. He was in Bowring hospital as an inpatient from 19.3.2005 to 27.4.2005. PW2 has stated chat he is suffering from 20% to the whole body on account of shortening of right lower limb and restriction of right knee and right ankle, The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs. 2,44,600/- Out of which Rs. 75,000/- towards pain and suffering, Rs. 15,000/- towards medical conveyance and attendant charge, Rs. 15,000/- towards loss of income during the period of treatment and Rs. 1,29,600/- towards loss of income and RS. 10,000/- towards loss of amenities in life. Being not satisfied with the same, the present appeal is filed for enhancement.

2.

Having heard the counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that the compensation under the heads, future loss of income and loss of amenities are cm lower side. The Tribunal did not consider the income of the claimant for the purpose of evaluation of the future lose of income property and percentage of disability taken is also on lower side. Therefore if we recalculate considering his salary as Rs. 4000/- p.m. and 20% disability and considering his age, the Appellant is entitled for further sum of Rs. 50,000/- under the head, fixture loss of income. As he was unmarried and being driver he has (sic) suffer on account of the shortening of right lower limb and restriction of right ankle and right (sic). Therefore the compensation awarded under the head, loss of amenities is on lower side because it has also effected the marriage prospectus, therefore we are (sic) to award a sum of Rs. 25,000/- under the aforesaid head.

3.

Thus, in all, the Appellant is entitled for an enhanced compensation of Rs. 75,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of payment.

4.

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed-in-part. The Appellant is entitled for an enhanced compensation of Rs. 75,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the-date of petition till the date of payment. Out of which a sum of Rs. 50,000/- with interest accrued thereon/is ordered to be deposited in the name of the Appellant for a period of 5 years and he is entitled to withdraw the periodical interest.