JUDGMENT :

P.S. Dinesh Kumar, J.

1. This appeal is preferred by the claimants in MVC 1822/2011 on the file of II Addl. Judge & Member, MACT., Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru (SCCH-13) (Tribunal' for short) awarding a sum of Rs. 50,000/- payable with 6% interest p.a. vide judgment and award dated 10.10.2012.

2. Brief facts of the case:

"Appellants - claimants are husband and three minor children of one Smt. Padma @ Padmavathi, who met with a road traffic accident on 16.12.2010 at about 2 p.m. at Puttappanadoddi, Channapatna on Bengaluru - Mysuru road when a bus bearing No. KA-01-D-9256 dashed against her. After first aid, at Government Hospital, she was shifted to NIMHANS, Bengaluru and thereafter to Dr. Malathi Manipal Hospital, Bengaluru where she underwent several procedures/surgeries. After discharge, she was taking follow-up treatment at Sri Lakshmi Hospital. She died on 27.12.2010 at about 9.20 p.m."

3. Claimants brought an action against the respondents before the Tribunal for compensation. First respondent, Insurer resisted the claim contending inter alia that the police documents and the medical records disclose that the victim died due to 'cardiac infarction' and not due to road traffic accident. The post mortem report also indicates that the cause of death is congestive cardiac failure due to 'Cardiac Infarction'. Therefore, there is no cause of action and accordingly prayed for dismissal of the petition.

4. On consideration of the pleadings, depositions and material on record, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the injuries sustained by the victim had no nexus with her death. However, taking cognizance of the fact that the appellants had spent Rs. 41,044/- towards medical expenses awarded a global compensation of Rs. 50,000/-. Hence, this appeal.

5. We have heard Sri M.B. Chandra Chooda, learned Counsel for the appellants, Sri H.N. Keshava Prashanth, learned Counsel for the first respondent and perused the material papers.

6. Learned Counsel for the appellants submits that the Tribunal grossly erred in holding that the death of the victim had no nexus to the injuries sustained in the road traffic accident. Adverting to the evidence of P.W. 4, Dr. Pramila who was treating the victim at Sri Lakshmi Hospital and P.W. 5 - Dr. Shyamala. V, who conducted the post mortem, he submits that a careful reading of deposition of these two Doctors should lead to an irresistible inference that the death of the victim was due to deteriorating prognosis culminating in cardiac failure. He therefore prays that this appeal be allowed.

7. Per contra, learned Counsel for the respondent vehemently submits that records clearly disclose that the victim met with a road traffic accident on 15.12.2010 and died on 27.12.2010. In the interregnum, she was treated and discharged from Dr. Malathi Manipal Hospital. The cause of death recorded in the post mortem report is 'cardiac failure'. Therefore, victim's death has no nexus with the injuries sustained by her in the road traffic accident. Tribunal is right in its judgment, which is in consonance with a ruling in the case of Uttam Kumar v. Madhav and another reported in ILR 2002 KAR 1864 and accordingly prays for dismissal of this appeal.

8. Facts are not in dispute. Victim met with the accident on 16.12.2010. She was under treatment in Dr. Malathi Manipal Hospital from 16.12.2010 to 22.12.2010. She was admitted on 24.12.2010 in Sri Lakshmi Hospital and died on 27.12.2010.

9. Discharge Summary issued by Sri Lakshmi Hospital dated 24.1.2011 discloses that victim was admitted with complaint of vomiting. The history of accident and treatment given in Dr. Malathi Manipal Hospital is also recorded in the summary. Condition of victim just prior to her death is recorded as follows:-

"On 27.12.10 9.20 p.m.

Pt. collapsed suddenly, CPCR done. Not fruitful.

Declared dead at 9.45 p.m."

10. In the light of above