SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 52688

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF MAY 2022

BEFORE

THE HON9BLE MR. JUSTICE H. T. NARENDRA PRASAD

MFA No.2519 OF 2020(MV)

C/W MFA No.4621 OF 2020 (MV)

IN MFA No.2519 OF 2020

BETWEEN

THE RELIANCE GENERAL

INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,

EAST WING, 5TH FLOOR

NO.28, CENTENARY BUILDING

M G ROAD

BENGALURU - 560001

NOW REPRESENTED BY MANAGER LEGAL

...APPELLANT

(BY SRI ASHOK N PATIL, ADVOCATE)

AND

1 . GANGADHARA C V

S/O VENKATESHAPPA

AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS

R/AT MAACHINNEPALLI VILLAGE

NALLAPPAREDDIPALLI,

BAGEPALLI TALUK

CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT 3 561207

2

2 . THE MANAGER

NITHYA ENETERPRISES

OFFICE AT THAVAREKERE VILLAGE

NANDAGUDI HOBLI

HOSAKOTE TALUK

BENGALURU - 562114

&RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI TEJAS.N, ADVOCATE FOR R1;

NOTICE TO R2 SERVED BUT UNREPRESENTED)

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT

AGAINST

THE

AWARD

DATED

13.01.2020 PASSED IN MVC NO.4474/2018 ON THE

FILE OF THE X ADDITIONAL JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL

CAUSES,

MOTOR

ACCIDENT

CLAIMS

TRIBUNAL,

BENGALURU (SCCH-16), AWARDING COMPENSATION

OF RS.16,09,600/- WITH INTEREST AT 9 PERCENT

P.A. (EXCLUDING FUTURE MEDICAL EXPENSES OF

RS.2,50,000/-) FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL

REALIZATION.

IN MFA No.4621 OF 2020

SRI GANGADHARA C V

S/O. VENKATESHAPPA,

AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS,

R/AT MAACHINNEPALLI VILLAGE,

NALLAPPAREDDIPALLI,

BAGEPALI TALUK,

CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT-561 207.

(BY SRI TEJAS N, ADVOCATE)

3

1 .

THE MANAGER

NITHYA ENTERPRISES,

OFFICE AT THAVAREKERE VILLAGE,

NANDAGUDI HOBLI,

HOSAKOTE TALUK,

BANGALORE-562 114.

(OWNER OF TIPPER BEARING REG. NO.KA-53-C-

9109)

2 .

THE MANAGER

RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD.,

NO.28, EAST WING, 5TH FLOOR,

CENTENARY BUILDING,

M.G. ROAD,

BANGALORE-560 001.

(POLICY NO.141521823340034780 VALID FROM

05-05-2018 TO 04-05-2019)

(BY SRI ASHOK N. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R2;

NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH)

JUDGMENT

AWARD

DATED

13.01.2020 PASSED IN MVC NO.4474/2018 ON THE

FILE OF THE X ADDITIONAL JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL

CAUSES, MACT, BENGALURU (SCCH-16), PARTLY

ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION

AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

4

THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION

THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

MFA 2519/2020 is filed by the Insurance

Company and MFA 4621/2020 is filed by the claimant

under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988

(hereinafter referred to as 8the Act9) being aggrieved

by the judgment and decree dated 13.1.2020 passed

by Court of Small Causes and MACT, Bengaluru in

MVC 4474/2018.

2.

Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeals

briefly stated are that on 14.7.2018, the claimant was

proceeding on his motorcycle near Shanthinekethana

School at Bagapalli, at that time, tipper lorry bearing

registration No.KA-53-C-9109 being driven by its

driver at a high speed and in a rash and negligent

manner, dashed to the vehicle of the claimant. As a

5

result

of

the

aforesaid

accident,

the

claimant

sustained grievous injuries and was hospitalized.

3.

The claimant filed a petition under Section

166 of the Act seeking compensation. It was pleaded

that

he

spent

huge

amount

towards

medical

expenses, conveyance, etc. It was further pleaded

that the accident occurred purely on account of the

rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by

its driver.

4.

On service of notice, the respondent No.2

appeared through counsel and filed written statement

in which the averments made in the petition were

denied. It was pleaded that the petition itself is false

and frivolous in the eye of law. It was further pleaded

that the accident was due to the rash and negligent

riding of the vehicle by the claimant himself. The

6

liability is subject to terms and conditions of the

policy. Hence, he sought for dismissal of the petition.

The respondent No.1 did not appear before the

Tribunal inspite of service of notice and was placed

ex-parte.

5.

On the basis of the pleadings of the parties,

the Claims Tribunal framed the issues and thereafter

recorded the evidence. The claimant himself was

examined as PW-1 and Dr.Ramesh was examined as

PW-4 and two more witnesses as PW-2 and 3 and got

exhibited documents namely Ex.P1 to Ex.P33. On

behalf of the respondents, neither any witness was

examined nor any document was produced. The

Claims Tribunal, by the impugned judgment, inter alia,

held that the accident took place on account of rash

and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its

driver, as a result of which, the claimant sustained

injuries. The Tribunal further held that the claimant is

7

entitled to a compensation of Rs.16,09,600/- along

with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. and directed the

Insurance Company to deposit the compensation

amount along with interest. Being aggrieved, these

appeals have been filed.

6.

The learned counsel for the Insurance

Company has raised following contentions:

Firstly, the claimant claims t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top