JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the appellants under Section

173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short hereinafter referred to as MV Act) challenging the judgment and award dated 01.10.2019 passed in MVC No.173/2017 by the 1st Additional Senior Civil Judge and Additional MACT- VII, Shivamogga, (for short hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal') for seeking enhancement of compensation. 2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for respondent No.3- Insurance Company. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 are served and unrepresented.

3. The appellants were petitioners and the respondents were respondents before the Tribunal. The status of the parties before the Tribunal is retained for the sake of convenience.

4. The case of the petitioners is that, the petitioner filed petition under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act (for short ‘M.V. Act’) claiming compensation of Rs.41 lakhs for death of Parasappa, the husband of the petitioner No.1 and father of petitioner Nos.2 and 3 due to accident on 28.3.2015. It is alleged that when the deceased along with others were going to the work for cutting the grass, while returning from their work the Parasappa along with two others were travelling in their motor cycle bearing No.KA-14-EF-2990 towards Ayanuru. At that time, while going near Siddeshwara temple on NH.206 in front of the Bhramalingeshwara fertilizer shop at Ayanuru at about 5.00 p.m. a bus bearing Reg.No.KA-15-6869 driven in a rash and negligent manner dashed to the motor cycle, due to which the pillion riders fell down on the road along with the motor cycle. The deceased Parsappa sustained grievous head injuries and succumbed to the injuries on the spot. Hence, prayed for enhancing the compensation.

5. On receipt of the summons respondent Nos.1 and

3 appeared before the court through their counsel. The respondent No.2 was placed Ex-parte. Respondent No.1 has not filed any statement of objection. However, respondent No.3/Insurance Company filed statement of objections by denying the rash and negligent driving and also denied age, occupation and income of the deceased as false and contended that there is no disability and there is no avocation. Hence, prayed for dismissing the petition.

6. On the basis of pleadings, the tribunal framed the following issues for consideration:

1. Whether the petitioners prove that on

28.03.2015, at about 5.00 pm., on NH 206, near Siddeswara Temple, Ayanuru village, Shivamogga taluk, while the deceased Parasappa was travelling as pillion rider on the motr cycle bearing Reg No. KA 14 EF 2990 towards Ayanoor village, driven by one Praveena, he sustained the grievous injuries and died at the spot due to the accident to the bike caused by Vijayalaxmi bus bearing Reg No.KA 15 6869 due to the rash and negligent driving of the said bus by the 1st respondent?

2. Whether the 3rd respondent proves that the petition is bad for non joinder of necessary party ?

3. Whether the 3rd respondent proves that the 1st respondent had no valid driving licence to drive the Bus in question. ?

4. Whether the petitioner is entitled for compensation as prayed? If so, how much and at what rate of interest and from whorn?

5. What order or award??

7. To prove the case of the petitioners, the petitioner No.1 was examined as P.W.1. and also examined one more witness. They got marked documents from Exs.P1 to P11. Respondent No.3 examined RTO officer as RW1 and Exs.R1 to R3 documents were marked. The RW2-Senior Assistant of respondent No.3 was also examined and Exs.R4 and R5 were marked. After hearing the arguments, the tribunal answered issue No.1 in affirmative and issue Nos.2 and 3 in negative. Issue No.4 partly in affirmative. Accordingly, granted compensation of Rs.8,03,000/-, which is as under;

Loss of dependency Rs.6,77,688/-