JUDGMENT :

The claimant being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 27.1.2012, passed in MVC No.981/2010, by the Prl. Senior Civil Judge and Addl. MACT, Belagavi, has filed this appeal.

2. The case of the claimant before the tribunal is that, on 4.5.2009, at about 13.30 hours, the claimant was proceeding from Tolagi to Itagi on motorcycle bearing No.KA-22/S-9364, in a moderate speed. At that time the driver of Maruti car bearing registration No.KA-23/M-4112 came from the opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner towards wrong side and dashed to the motorcycle of the claimant resulting into accident and consequently injuries were caused to him. He was admitted in Vijaya Hospital, Belagavi, where he took treatment by spending amount. He was aged about 23 years and working as a mason earning Rs. 40,000/-per year. Therefore he claimed compensation under section 163A of the M.V.Act, against the owner and insurer of the offending vehicle.

3. In pursuance of the notice, respondent No.1 owner of the offending vehicle remained absent and he was placed exparte. Respondent No.2 insurer appeared through his counsel and filed objections denying the claim of the claimant, his age, income and occupation. It is also denied that accident was due to the rash and negligent driving of the Maruti car. It is also contended that the driver of Maruti car did not possess a valid and effective driving license. It is contended that the accident in question occurred due to the rash and negligent riding of the motorcycle by the claimant himself. Therefore he is not liable to pay the compensation.

4. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the tribunal framed issues. In support of his claim, the claimant got examined himself as PW.1 and one witness as PW.2 and got marked 16 documents as Exs.P.1 to P.16. On behalf of the respondents, respondent No.2 examined two witnesses as RW.1 and RW.2 and got marked 3 documents as Exs.R.1 to R.3.

5. The tribunal, after hearing both the parties, passed the impugned judgment awarding compensation of Rs. 90,955/-, however, directed deduction of 50% of the said compensation towards the negligence on the part of the claimant in causing the accident and thereby award came to be passed for Rs. 45,478/-with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization. Respondent No.2 insurer was directed to pay the compensation amount.

6. The claimant being aggrieved by the impugned judgment and award, wherein 50% of the compensation was deducted towards his negligence in causing the accident, has filed the present appeal. It is contended that the tribunal was not justified in holding that the appellant has contributed to the accident to the extent of 50% and thereby deducted 50% of the compensation awarded in the claim petition.

7. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

8. The learned counsel for the appellant relying on the judgment in the case of United India Insurance Co. Ltd., vs. Sunil Kumar and another, AIR 2017 SC 5710 and the judgment of this Court in The Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Company Limited, Raichur, vs. Smt.Kamalamma and others, 2019 (2) KAR.L.J. 575, submitted that two vehicles are involved in the case and the negligence is also attributed against the petitioner and the driver of the offending vehicle. It is submitted that the claimant has got an option either to file the petition under section 163A or under section 166 of the M.V. Act under such circumstances. Therefore the learned counsel further submitted that deduction of 50% of the compensation awarded in the case towards the negligence of the claimant is not sustainable in law and that he is entitled for the entire compensation amount awarded in the claim petition. Per contra, the learned counsel for the insurer has supported the impugned judgment and award.

9. The tribunal has recorded a finding that the accident in question occurred due to the negligence on the part of the claimant as well as the dri