The court held that negligence was proven against the bus driver and reassessed the claimant's functional disability to 85%, leading to modified compensation of Rs.49,83,440.

JUDGMENT :

VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL, J.

MFA No.103904/2018 is filed by the appellant/Insurance Company, whereas MFA CROB No.100066/2019 is filed by the Cross Objector/claimant seeking enhancement of compensation. The appeal and cross objection are arising out of the judgment and award dated 25.07.2018 passed in MVC No.109/2015 on the file of learned II Addl. Senior Civil Judge and Addl. MACT, Ranebennur, [For short, ‘Tribunal’]

2. Brief facts are that on 10.07.2014 at about 12.30 p.m., the claimant - Chandraprakash was proceeding on a motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-20/EE-6581 near Shingeri Kodlu, Kullange village. At that time, the bus bearing reg.KA-20/B-7544 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the motorcycle of the claimant. As a result of which, the claimant-Chandraprakash fell down and sustained grievous injuries. Immediately he was shifted to Government Hospital, Kundapur and thereafter he was shifted to Kasturba Hospital, Manipal. For further treatment, he was shifted to Manipal Hospital, Bengaluru for the injuries sustained. It is averred that the claimant was aged about 31 years at the time of the accident and he was a Proprietor of Computer Centre and agent-cum-advisor of Reliance Life Insurance Company Limited and was earning annual income of Rs.5,00,000/-. Hence, he filed claim petition seeking compensation for Rs.64,00,000/-.

3. The respondents No.1 and 2 filed separate written statements denying the entire averments made in the claim petition. Respondent No.2/Insurance Company denied the occupation and income of the injured. It was contended that the accident took place due to rash and negligent riding of rider i.e., claimant himself. Hence, they sought to dismiss the claim petition.

4. The Tribunal recorded the evidence, claimant examined himself as PW.1 and examined Doctor-V.Vasudeva Rao as PW.2 and got marked Exs.P.1 to P.41. The respondent No.2 examined RW.1 and got marked Exs.R.1 to R.3.

5. The Tribunal on appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence on record, awarded total compensation of Rs.33,40,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization by directing the appellant-Insurance Company to pay the compensation. Being aggrieved, the insurance company and the injured claimant have filed this appeal and cross objection, respectively.

6. Learned counsel Sri.G.N.Raichur for the appellant-insurer submits that the Tribunal has committed a grave error in recording the finding that the driver of the bus insured by the appellant was negligent and caused the accident. The said finding would run contrary to Ex.P.2-the police complaint given by the driver of the Durgadevi bus. The version in the complaint is immediately after the occurrence of accident, which was conveniently changed by the Police in collusion with the injured claimant and charge sheet was filed against the driver of the insured bus. It is further submitted that Exs.R.2 and R.3 are the letters written by the Investigating Officer to the RTO requesting for inspection of the motorbike and to the Karsturba Medical Hospital for Wound Certificate, wherein the Investigating Officer has clearly stated that the accident is caused due to bike skid. These documents corroborate with the Ex.P.2 which indicates that the accident was caused by the claimant himself and the accident was by self skid. However, the Police, in collusion with the claimant, filed the charge sheet against the driver of the insured bus. It is submitted that injured claimant has not denied Ex.P.2 and now he cann