The main legal point established in the judgment is the use of evidence and legal provisions to determine liability and calculate compensation in a motor vehicle accident case.

JUDGMENT

P.KRISHNA BHAT J. - MFA No. 101253/2019 is filed by the claimants and MFA No.101435/2019 is by the owner of the offending vehicle in question challenging the judgment and award dtd. 12/2/2019 rendered in MVC No.1796/2016 on the file of the learned VI Addl. District Judge and Addl. MACT, Belagavi (for short, 'Tribunal').

2. Brief facts insofar as they are relevant for the present purposes are that on 13/1/2016, deceased Vijay Jumnalkar, husband of the 1st claimant, father of the 2nd claimant and son of the 3rd claimant had been to Vijaya Nagar, Belagavi to meet one of his acquaintances and when both of them reached the road near Atawadkar Layout, Vijaya Nagar, offending Bolero vehicle bearing registration No.KA-22-P-1449 being driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner and in high speed came from Sainandan Residency towards Atawadkar Layout and dashed against the deceased and dragged him to some distance and on account of the said impact, he died in the spot itself.

3. On the claim petition being filed, respondents entered appearance through their learned counsel. Respondents No.1 to 3 have filed their statement of objections denying the material averments made in the claim petition. It was mainly pleaded that respondent No.1 was the registered owner of the offending vehicle and it was being used by his friend respondent No.3by paying insurance premium and he was also holding valid driving license and while admitting the incident, it was attributed in the statement of objections to the sudden darting across the road by deceased himself. It was also pleaded that respondent No.2, who was a minor was not at all concerned with the accident as he was sitting near the driver as a family member of the respondents.

4. Respondent No.4-Insurance Company has filed its separate statement of objections specifically contending that the respondents had entrusted the vehicle to the minor respondent No.2 and without holding any valid driving license he was driving the same and caused the accident. In the said circumstances, respondent No.4-insurer had totally disclaimed its liability to pay the compensation.

5. During the trial, claimant No.1 was examined as PW1 and landlady of the deceased was examined as PW2 and one Ravindra V Gurav, who is stated to be the eye-witness was examined as PW3. Ex.P1 to Ex.P41 were marked for the claimants. Respondent No.1 in the claim petition was examined as RW1, Respondent No.3 was examined as RW2 and two other witnesses were examined as RW3 and RW4. Ex.R1 to Ex.R5 were marked for the respondents.

6. Learned MACT after hearing the learned counsel on both sides and appreciating the evidence produced on both sides passed the impugned award allowing the claim petition in part and awarding a compensation of Rs.7,74,088.00 with interest thereon at 6% per annum from the date of petition till date of realization.

7. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the Trial Court records carefully.

8. The owner's appeal in MFA No.101435/2019 is liable to be rejected on the following grounds agreeing with the findings of the learned MACT:

(a) The accident took place on 13/1/2016 at around 7:00 of the clock and at around 9:00 of the clock FIR has been lodged by PW-3 specifically mentioning that the minor - Varun, who happens to be the second respondent, was driving the offending vehicle. This FIR was challenged by the owner of the offending vehicle in a Criminal Petition vide Ex.P40. This Court dismissed the Criminal Petition vide Ex.P41, wherein, paragraph No.7 reads as under:

"7. I have perused the grounds urged in the petition, FIR, Complaint and also the other materials i.e., charge sheet filed, copy of which is also produced by the counsel for the petitioner. Looking to the materials placed on record the first and foremost contention of the counsel for the petitioner herein as the police were present at the spot immediately after the incident and came to know about happening of such