In cases of composite negligence, claimants can recover full compensation from any joint tortfeasor with liability ratios determined for inter se recovery rights.

JUDGMENT :

(HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR, J.)

This appeal is filed by the claimants challenging the judgment and award dated 31.01.2012, passed in MVC No.591/2008, on the file of I Additional Senior Civil Judge and Additional MACT, Dharwad, sitting at Navalgund (for short, ‘Tribunal’), seeking enhancement of compensation.

2. Brief facts leading to filing of this appeal are that on 05.06.2008, at about 1.30 p.m., near KEB grid of Bangareppa extension on Gadag-Hubli road near Annigeri village of Navalgund taluk, the deceased Prakash (for short, ‘deceased’) was proceeding on a motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-25/Q-7073 from Gadag to Hubli. At that time, respondent No.5 came by a motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-26/H-8836 from opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the deceased. Due to the impact, the deceased fell down on the road. At that time, a lorry bearing registration No.KA-25/B-132, being driven by respondent No.3, came with high speed and in a rash and negligent manner and ran over on the deceased. Due to which, the deceased died on the spot. The claimants, being wife, daughtf the deceased, have filed the claim petition, seeking compensation.

3. The Tribunal has awarded a compensation of Rs.4,24,000/- along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit by fastening liability on respondent Nos.1, 2 and 5. It is held that respondent Nos.1 and 2, being owner and insurer of the lorry bearing registration No.KA-25/B-132, are jointly and severally liable to pay 50% of compensation amount and respondent No.5, being owner of the motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-26/H-8836, is liable to pay remaining 50% of compensation amount.

4. The learned counsel for the appellants/claimants submitted that the accident occurred due to composite negligence between the motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-26/H-8836 and driver of lorry bearing registration No.KA-25/B-132. Due to this composite negligence, the deceased died in the accident. Though the Tribunal has correctly held that the owner and insurer of lorry are jointly and severally liable to pay 50% of compensation amount and respondent No.5, being owner of lorry bearing registration No.KA-25/B-132, is liable to pay remaining 50% of compensation amount, but liberty is not given to the claimants to proceed against the insurer of lorry to receive compensation in full by giving an option to respondent No.2/insurer to recover the same from respondent No.5. He places reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of KHENYEI Vs. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED AND OTHERS reported in (2015) 9 SCC 273 and a full bench decision of this Court in MFA No.4552/1997 C/w Cross Appeal No.11/1998 and MFA Nos.2217/1998, 2218/1998, 2219/1998, 2220/1998 and 2221/1998 dated 06.11.2003. Further, it is submitted that the quantum of compensation is on the lesser side. Therefore, prays for enhancement of compensation.

5. Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants further submitted that the issue involved in the case is composite negligence between three vehicles therefore, prays for directing the Insurance Company to deposit entire award amount with a liberty to the Insurance Company to recover the remaining 50% of the award amount from respondent No.5. He also places reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case Khenyei and also prays for enhancement of compensation.

6. On the other hand, the learned counsel for respondent No.2/Insurance Company submitted that the Tribunal has correctly held the apportionment of rashness and neg