The main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of compensation in a motor vehicle accident case based on the offending vehicle's rash and negligent driving, loss of dependency, loss of consortium, and medical expenses.

JUDGMENT/ORDER

R.DEVDAS, J. - MFA No.103202/2016 and MFA No.100148/2017 are filed at the hands of the National Insurance Company, while MFA Cr. Ob. No. 100029/2017 filed in MFA No.100148/2017, and the MFA No.100290/2017 are filed by the claimants seeking enhancement of the compensation.

2. Since all these matters arise out of a common accident, the same are heard together and disposed off by this common judgment.

3. It was the case of the claimants that on 1/1/2015 a light motor vehicle Bolero bearing Reg.No.KA-25/P-6722 was being driven from Belagavi towards Bagalkot on the State Highway. The vehicle collided against a stationed lorry bearing Reg.No.KA-22/B-4249 and all the occupants of the Bolero vehicle were severely injured. Some of the occupants succumbed to the injuries and died. Insofar as the claim of the petitioners in MVC No.692/2015 and MFA Cr. Ob. No.100029/2017 is concerned, the contention is that the deceased Santosh Suresh Vannur was walking on the footpath and the Bolero vehicle came from behind, dashed against the deceased person throwing him of the ground and further the vehicle proceeded and dashed against the stationed lorry. Although it was contended on behalf of the appellant-Insurance Company that accident had occurred only due to the negligence of the lorry driver who had parked the vehicle on a State Highway without taking precautions, the said contention was negatived by the Tribunal and the Tribunal proceeded to award compensation to the claimants. However, since two appeals are filed at the hands of the Insurance Company, the contention of the Insurance Company shall be considered first.

4. Having regard to the evidence available on record, this court is of the considered opinion that Ex.P4 which is the spot sketch and panchanama corroborates with the contention raised by the claimants in MVC No.692/2015 (pedestrian). The spot sketch and panchanama clearly shows that the deceased Santosh Suresh Vannur was walking on the left side of the footpath on the State Highway and the offending vehicle Bolero came from behind and dashed against the pedestrian. Therefore, offending vehicle which was driven in a rash and negligent manner proceeded to collide with the stationed truck which was parked on the left side of the road. There is no doubt that the Bolero vehicle was being driven in a rash and negligent manner which was the cause for the accident. Initially, having collided with a pedestrian who was walking on the foot path, the further course of the offending vehicle going and colliding with the stationed truck would also justify the contentions raised by the claimants that the Bolero vehicle was being driven in a rash and negligent manner and therefore, the blame cannot be shifted on the driver of the stationed truck, even if the tail lights were not put on as sought to be contended by the appellant-Insurance Company.

5. Learned counsel Sri.S.V.Yaji appearing for the appellant-Insurance Company seeks to place reliance on a decision of this Court in the case of New India Assurance Co., Ltd. Vs. Yousurf Basha and another reported in 2015 ACJ 1216. No doubt, it has been opined that necessary care and precaution is required to be taken while parking heavy vehicles on the highways, if it is a national highway or State highway. However, having regard to the material available on record, it is clear that there can be no manner of doubt that the driver of the Bolero vehicle after colliding with a pedestrian, last control and thereafter proceeded to dash against the stationed truck. In that view of the matter, the fact matrix obtained in the present case is not the same as the case in Yousurf Basha supra which was cited by the appellant-Insurance company. In that view of the matter, this Court is of the considered opinion that the two appeals filed by the Insurance Company raising a challenge to the liability fastened on the Bolero Vehicle cannot be sustained. Accordingly, both the appeals filed by the National I