SHARANAMMA Vs. MOHAMMAD IMRAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The claimant has filed the present appeal for enhancement against the Judgment and award dated: 08-10-2009 made in MVC No.1585/2008 on the file of Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) Shorapur awarding the compensation of Rs.1,09,000/- with 6% interest per annum from the date of petition till realization.

(2.) It is the case of the claimant that on 23-07- 2008 at about 5.00 a.m., the claimant was proceeding towards Shahapur by walk with villagers on the left side on mud road, when the claimant was near Vibhutihalli village on Shahapur Shorapur main road, at that time Tata 909 Goods (lorry) bearing Reg. No.KA-13-A-1830 came from back side in rash and negligent manner and dashed to the claimant, due to which the claimant sustained fracture of middle third right tibia and fibula and grievous injury over the left shoulder. Immediately he was shifted to Shahapur Government hospital and again shifted to Government General hospital Gulbarga. She was in-patient from 23-07-2008 to 30-07-2008 and incurred medical expenses more than Rs.30,000/- and she is still under treatment with private Doctors in Shahapu. Prior to the accident she was hale and healthy and doing animal husbandry and coolie, she was also selling milk and milk products and maintaining four she buffaloes, she was doing coolie work and she use to earn Rs.350/- per day, now due to the accident she is suffering from permanent disability and not in a position to work and walk etc. Therefore she filed claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.04,95,000/-.

(3.) The respondent No.1 remained absent and placed ex-parte. The respondent No.2/Insurance Company appeared through its counsel and filed objection to the claim petition and denied the averments made in the claim petition and denied the age, occupation and income of the claimant. It was further contended that, due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of the Tata 909 Goods (lorry) bearing Reg. No.KA- 13-A-1830 accident was caused and further contended that, the driver of the said vehicle was not having valid and effective driving license as on the date of the accident. It is also denied the medical expenses spend by the claimant as alleged and income as stated by the claimant. It was contended that, the compensation claimed on different heads is highly excessive, exorbitant and disproportionate to the injuries sustained by the claimant. Therefore sought for dismissal of the claim petition.