He thus laid the claim for a total companypensation of Rs.40,75,000/ under different heads for the injuries sustained by him.
He was in the said hospital as an inpatient till June, 2004.
Because of the disability, he had to resign his job as an Engineer and take up a desk job in Industrial Development Bank of India.
The appellant had to resign his job as an Engineer and take up a desk job in a private Bank, which he may lose due to recession in the economy.
The respondent resisted the claim of the appellant.
3293 of 2007.
According to him, due to amputation of his left leg, he suffered 100 permanent disability.
Against the said award, both the appellant as well as the respondent filed appeals before the High Court of Karnataka, the appellant seeking enhancement, while the respondent for reduction.
He thus prayed that in the facts and circumstances of the case, just and reasonable companypensation be granted to the appellant.
However, while agreeing that the appellant that as per Schedule I of the Workmens Compensation Act, he suffered 80 permanent disability, taking into companysideration the subsequent employment of the appellant in Industrial Development Bank of India as a Grade B Officer, held that the appellant did number suffer any loss of future earnings on account of his permanent disability, and accordingly, disallowed the claim of the appellant under the head loss of earnings.
He filed claim petition being M.V.C. No.
However, the High Court has without any valid and proper reason, without companysidering the above facts and without appreciating the evidence properly, has drastically reduced the just and reasonable companypensation awarded by the Tribunal.
The companypensation payable to the appellant under the heads loss of amenities and loss of marriage prospects, also requires enhancement.
Being a bachelor, he has lost prospects of getting married.
The Tribunal companysidering the evidence placed by the appellant, both oral and documentary, awarded in all Rs.30,60,160/ as companypensation to the appellant under different heads.
In the accident, he sustained grievous and fracture injuries to the knee and also left hand.
It is also number in dispute that the appellant is B.E. Degree holder in Metallurgy and was working as Quality Engineer in Hospet Steels Ltd. Though the appellant companytended that at the time of accident he was earning Rs.17,200/ per month, but in the absence of any document produced by the appellant to prove the same, the Tribunal as well as the High Court, took the monthly salary of the appellant at Rs.12,840/ as evidenced by Ex.
V. RAMANA, J. These appeals by special leave are directed against the Judgment passed by the High Court of Karnataka, Circuit Bench at Dharwad in M.F.A. No.
He is aged 24 years and was working as Quality Engineer in Hospet Steels Ltd. On 13.04.2004 while he was returning to his home from the companypany he met with an accident.
At the time of accident, he was getting monthly salary of Rs.17,200/ .as an Engineer.
4502 of 2007 C W. M.F.A. No.
515 of 2004 before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Hubli, stating that he is B.E. Degree holder in Metallurgy.
He was taken to a hospital in Hubli for treatment, where his left leg was amputated.
The appellant is the claimant.
Thereafter, he took treatment at Tulasidas Gopalji Charitable and Dhakleswar Temple Trust and All India Institute of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Bombay and he is still under treatment and presently walking with the assistance of an artificial limb.
