Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2022 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI M.F.A.NO.8300 OF 2011 (MV)
C/W M.F.A.NO.6788 OF 2011 (MV), M.F.A.NO.6789 OF 2011 (MV), M.F.A.NO.8301 OF 2011 (MV)
IN M.F.A.NO.8300 OF 2011 BETWEEN:
THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, NO.25, 1ST FLOOR, SHANKARNARAYANA BUILDING, M.G.ROAD, BANGALORE 3 560 001 NOW REPRESENTED BY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER SANDEEP KUMAR, REGIONAL OFFICE, KRISHI BHAVAN, HUDSON CIRCLE, BANGALORE 3 560 001 & APPELLANT (BY SRI. L SREEKANTA RAO, ADVOCATE)
AND:
11. SMT N PRAVEENA W/O LATE KRISHNA MURTHY REDDY @ CHINNA REDDY
26 YEARS, 2. SRI N MOBILI REDDY S/O LATE RAMA REDDY, 72 YEARS, 3. SMT CHINNAMMA W/O N MAGILI REDDY, 56 YEARS, 4. MASTER SAI DESHWANTH S/O LATE KRISHNA MURTHY REDDY @ CHINNA REDDY, 11 YEARS, SINCE THE 4TH PETITIONER IS MINOR REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN i.e., FIRST PETITIONER ALL ARE RESIDING AT JEGURAKULAPALLI VILLAGE, MANGALAPALLI POST, THAVANAMAPALLI, MANDALAM, CHITOOR DISTRICT
5. SRI P R ANIL KUMAR S/O P RAJA REDDY, MAJOR NO.52, KOTUR THIMMAKUPPAM POST, BANGARUPALYAM MANDAL, CHITOOR DISTRICT, A.P-517002 ...RESPONDENTS (SRI. K.N.HARISH BABU, ADVOCATE FOR R1-R4;
V/O/DTD 23.06.2015, R5 SERVICE HELD SUFFICIENT)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD PASSED IN MVC NO.490/2010 DATED 03.03.2011 ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF SMALL CAUSES AND MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL AT BANGALORE AS AGAINST THE APPELLANT; ALLOW THE APPEAL WITH COSTS.
IN M.F.A.NO.6788 OF 2011 BETWEEN:
1. SMT A DEVAKI, W/O LATE REDDAPPA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, 2. SMT. A. KUPPAMMA, W/O LATE KRISHNA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, 3. KUMARI A. BHAGYA SRI, D/O LATE REDDAPPA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS, 4. KUMARI A. GAUTHAMI, D/O LATE REDDAPPA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS, (SINCE THE 4TH APPELLANT IS MINOR SHE IS DULY REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN i.e., THE 1ST PETITIONER)
ALL ARE RESIDING AT KOLLAPALLI VILLAGE, YARLAPALLI POST, GRELA MANDALAM, CHITTOOR DISTRICT 3 517 001 & APPELLANTS (BY SRI. K N HARISH BABU, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI P R ANILKUMAR, S/O P. RAJA REDDY, NO.52, KOTUR, THIMMAKUPPAM POST, BANGARUPALYAM MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT 3 517 001 2. THE REGIONAL MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, NO.25, 1ST FLOOR, SHANKAR NARAYAN BUILDING, M.G. ROAD, BANGALORE 3 560 001 ...RESPONDENTS (SRI. L.SREEKANTA RAO, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
R1 SERVED & UNREPRESENTED)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT PRAYING TO PASS AN ORDER BY ENHANCING THE COMPENSATION AWARD AMOUNT UNDER THE ABOVE SAID GROUNDS, BY MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 03.03.2011, PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE JUDGE AND MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL (SCCH-9) AT BANGALORE, IN MVC NO.491/2010 BY ENHACING THE COMPENSATION AMOUNT UNDER THE ABOVE SAID HEAD IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
IN M.F.A.NO.6789 OF 2011 BETWEEN:
1. SMT N PRAVEENA W/O LATE KRISHNA MURTHY REDDY @ CHINNA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, 2. SRI N MOGILI REDDY, S/O LATE RAMREDDY AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, 3. SMT CHINNAMMA W/O N MOGILI REDDY, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, 4. MASTER SAI DESHWANT S/O LATE KRISHNA MURTHY REDDY @ CHINNA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 11 YEARS, ALL ARE RESIDING AT JEGURAKULAPALLI VILLAGE, MANGALAPALLI POST, THAVANAMPALLI MANDALAM, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.
& APPELLANTS (BY SRI. K N HARISH BABU, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI P R ANILKUMAR, S/O P RAJA REDDY, NO.52, KOTUR, THIMMAKUPPAM POST, BANGARUPALYAM MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT (A.P)
22. THE REGIONAL MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, NO.25, 1ST FLOOR, SHANKAR NARAYAN BUILDING, M.G.ROAD, BANGALORE.
...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. L. SREEKANTA RAO, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
R1 SERVED & UNREPRESENTED)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT PRAYING TO PASS AN ORDER BY ENHANCING THE COMPENSATION AWARD AMOUNT UNDER THE ABOVE SAID GROUNDS, BY MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 03.03.2011, PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE JUDGE AND MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL (SCCH-9) AT BANGALORE IN MVC NO.490/2010 BY ENHANCING THE COMPENSATION AMOUNT UNDER THE ABOVE SAID HEAD IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
IN M.F.A.NO.8301 OF 2011 BETWEEN:
THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, NO.25, 1ST FLOOR, SHANKARNARAYANA BUILDING, M.G.ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001 NOW REPRESENTED BY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER SANDEEP KUMAR, REGIONAL OFFICE, KRISHI BHAVAN, HUDSON CIRCLE, BANGALORE 3 560 001 & APPELLANT (BY SRI. L SREEKANTA RAO, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SMT A DEVAKI W/O LATE REDDAPPA REDDY, 36 YEARS, 2. SMT A KUPPAMMA W/O LATE KRISHNA MURTHY, 66 YEARS
33. KUMARI A BHAGYA SRI D/O LATE REDDAPPA REDDY, 18 YEARS, 4. KUMARI A GAUTHAMI D/O LATE REDDAPPA REDDY, AGED 16 YEARS, SINCE THE 4TH RESPONDENT IS MINOR SHE IS REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN i.e., THE FIRST PETITIONER ALL ARE RESIDING OF KOLLAPALLI VILLAGE, YARIAPALLI POST, GRELA MANDALAM, CHITOOR DISTRICT.
55. SRI P R ANIL KUMAR S/O P RAJA REDDY, NO.52, KOTUR, THIMMAKUPPAM POST, BANGARUPALYAM MANDAL, CHITOOR DISTRICT, AP -517 002 ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K.N.HARISH BABU, ADVOCATE FOR R1-R4;
R5 IS SERVED & UNREPRESENTED)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD PASSED IN MVC NO.491/2010 DATED 03.03.2011 ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF SMALL CAUSES AND MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL AT BANGALORE AS AGAINST THE APPELLANT; ALLOW THE APPEAL WITH COSTS.
THESE MFAs HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED ON
30.06.2022, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
These appeals filed under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the MV Act') are arising out of common judgment and award dated 03.03.2011 in MVC.490/2010 and 491/2010.
2. MFA.No.6788/2011 is filed by petitioners in MVC.No.491/2010. MFA.No.6789/2011 is filed by petitioners in MVC.No.490/2010.
3. MFA.No.8300/2011 and 8301/2011 are filed by respondent No.2 - Insurance company against the judgment and award in MVC.No.490/2010 and 491/2010 respectively.
4. Since these appeals are arising out of common judgment and award, they are clubbed together and disposed of by a common judgment.
5. Since in both these petitions the respondents are common, for the sake of convenience they are referred to as respondent Nos.1 and 2. Since in the accident in question, two deaths have occurred giving rise to two separate claim petitions claiming compensation by their respective legal representatives, for the sake of convenience petitioners in MVC.No.490/2010 are referred to as LRs of Krishnamurthy Reddy and petitioners in MVC.No.491/21010 are referred to as LRs of Reddappa Reddy.
6. FACTS: Brief facts leading to the filing of claim petitions are that on 02.08.2009 at about 8.15 p.m. deceased Krishnamurthy Reddy was riding motor cycle bearing registration No.AP-03-AA-7037. He was proceeding from Chittoor to Chigurakolapalli. When he was infront of Anand Processing and Food Juice factory, rider of motor cycle bearing registration No.AP-03-P-2831 (hereinafter referred to as offending vehicle) i.e, deceased Redappa Reddy, came form the opposite direction in a high speed, in a rash or negligent manner and dashed against the motor cycle of deceased Krishnamurthy Reddy. As a result of the accident, both Krishnamurthy Reddy and Redappa Reddy sustained grievous injuries and died on the spot.
7. During the course of petition averments, LRs of Redappa Reddy have pleaded that at the time of accident, both Krishnamurthy Reddy and Redappa Reddy rode the offending vehicle in a high speed, in a rash or negligent manner and dashed against the motor cycle of each other. As a result of the accident, both riders died on the spot.
8. LRs of both deceased have pleaded that deceased were earning Rs.40,000/- p.a. Under Section 163-A of the MV Act, they are seeking compensation under no fault liability against the respondents i.e., the owner and insurer of the offending vehicle.
9. In his written statement, respondent No.1 i.e., the owner of the offending vehicle has admitted the ownership and coverage of the offending vehicle, date, time, place of accident and the death of both riders in the said accident. He has pleaded that charge sheet is filed against the riders of the both motor cycles and as the both riders died, the charge sheet is abated. However, he has denied that the accident occurred due to the rash or negligent driving by the rider of the offending vehicle. In MVC.No.491/2010, respondent No.1 has specifically pleaded that petition under Section 163-A of the MV Act is not maintainable against the owner and insurer of the offending vehicle by the LRs of deceased Redappa Reddy as he was not a third party. In the event of allowing the petitions, respondent No.1 has pleaded that respondent No.2 - Insurance company is liable to indemnify him.
10. In the written statement, respondent No.2 has denied the accident, relationship between the deceased and the petitioners, death of deceased in the said accident. Though respondent No.2 admit the coverage of the offending vehicle, it has taken up a specific defence that deceased Redappa Reddy who was riding the offending vehicle was not holding a valid driving license and as such respondent No.2 is not liable to indemnify the owner. Respondent No.2 has also pleaded that petition in MVC.No.491/2010 is not maintainable for not impleading the owner and insurer of motor cycle bearing registration No.AP-03-AA-7037.
11. Based on the pleadings, the Tribunal has framed necessary issues.
12. In MVC
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
