High CourtsSingle Bench(2013) 06 KAR CK 0028

Sri. Kumara vs Future General India Insurance Co. Ltd. and The Manager

Karnataka High Court · Decided on 21 June 2013

HON’BLE JUDGES
N. Ananda, J
RESULT
Partly Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous First Appeal No. 8777 of 2011 (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

16 paragraphs · 351 words

N. Ananda, J.—Memo filed for dispensation of notice to respondent No. 2 is accepted at the risk of appellant. Accepting the reasons stated in IA. 1/2011, delay of 10 days in filing the appeal is condoned. IA. 1/2011 is allowed.

2.

The lower court records are received. With the consent of the learned counsel for parties, the matter is taken up for final disposal.

3.

This is a claimant''s appeal for enhancement of compensation.

4.

I have heard Sri. Girimalliah, learned counsel for claimant and Sri. H.S. Lingaraj, learned counsel for Insurance Company.

5.

In the wound certificate issued by Rajshekar Hospital to which claimant was admitted immediately after the accident, it is shown that claimant had suffered the following injuries:

1.

Laceration over forehead to parietal region 10 x 10 cm. x skin deep

2.

Laceration over right shoulder

3.

Abrasions over right hand and right thigh

4.

Fracture shaft of right femur

6.

Later, claimant was treated in Sanjay Gandhi Hospital. In the discharge summary, it is shown that the claimant had suffered fractured shaft of right femur 1/3rd. However, in the discharge summary there is no reference to X-ray number or the diagnosis of fracture. The claimant was aged 22 years at the time of accident. The claimant has stated that he was an auto-rickshaw driver, but he has not produced the driving license.

7.

The Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs. . 1,84,680/- under the following heads:

8.

On hearing learned counsel for parties, after going through evidence and the impugned award, I find that compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of amenities is inadequate. The Tribunal has not awarded compensation towards attendant and conveyance charges. Therefore, I award additional compensation of Rs. .20,000/- towards loss of amenities and Rs. 10,000/- towards attendant''s and conveyance charges. Thus, claimant is entitled to total compensation of Rs. .2,14,680/-. In the result, I pass the following:

ORDER

The appeal is accepted in part. The impugned award is modified.

Compensation of Rs. 1,84,680/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 2,14,680/-.

The rest of the impugned award is confirmed.