1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2020

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

MFA NO. 5515 OF 2017(MV-I)

BETWEEN:

SRI HARIKRISHNA C S

S/O C VENKATARAMANAPPA,

AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS

R/O C/O RAMESH P

NO.40, 5TH MAIN, 2ND FLOOR,

BHUVANESHWARAINAGAR,

MAGADI ROAD,

NEAR PRASANNA THEATRE,

BANGALORE-560 023

...APPELLANT

(BY SRI.ANJANEYA.A.B, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.

ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL

INSURANCE CO LTD

BY ITS MANAGER

NO.89, SVR COMPLEX,

2ND FLOOR, NEAR AYYAPPA TEMPLE

HOSUR MAIN ROAD, MADIWALA

BANGALORE-560 068

(INSURER OF LORRY BEARING

REG.NO.HR-38-P-5918)

2

2.

M/S RINKU COMMERCIAL CARRIER

PVT.LTD., BY ITS MANAGER

NO.58/12A,

NIT FARIDABAD HARYANA,

PIN:121001

(RC OWNER OF LORRY BEARING

REG.NO .HR-38-P-5918)

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.H.N.KESHAVA PRASHANTH, ADVOCATE FOR

R1; NOTICE TO R2 IS D/W, V/O DTD: 04.12.2018)

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF

MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD

ATED:28.02.2017 PASSED IN MVC NO.2038/2014 ON

THE FILE OF THE XXI ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES

JUDGE

&

XX

ACMM

AND

MEMBER

MACT,

BENGALURU,

PARTLY

ALLOWING

THE

CLAIM

PETITION

FOR

COMPENSATION

AND

SEEKING

ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS

DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

3

JUDGMENT

The top noted appeal is filed by the claimant

against the judgment and award dated 28.2.2017

passed in MVC.No.2038/2014 by the XXII Additional

Small

Causes

Judge

and

XX

Additional

Chief

Metropolitan

Magistrate

and

MACT,

Bengaluru,

seeking enhancement of compensation.

2.

The facts leading to the filing of this case are

that on 7.3.2014 at about 9.15 p.m., the appellant was

riding Hero Honda Motor Cycle bearing Regn.No.KA-50-

H-663 from Doddaballapura towards Yellapura, slowly

and cautiously on the left side of the Road. When he

reached Essar Petrol Bund on D.B. Pura-Bengaluru

road, the driver of the lorry bearing Regn.No.HR-38-P-

5918 came from Essar Petrol Bunk, in a rash and

negligent manner and dashed against his motor cycle,

as a result of which, he fell down and sustained the

following injuries:

4

1.

“Right

frontopareital

acute

subdural

hemorrhage.

2. Left temporal contusion, midline shift.

3. Right humerus fracture.

4. Right knee laceration 2x2 cms.”

Hence, the case of the appellant before the Tribunal

was that he was working as a Quality Controller in a

factory and was earning salary of Rs.7500/- per month.

On

account

of

grievous

injuries

and

prolonged

treatment the appellant could not do his work and has

lost his income. Hence, filed the claim petition claiming

compensation of Rs.7 lakhs.

On receipt of notice, the first respondent-

Insurance Company contested the proceedings by filing

the written statement. The first respondent stoutly

denied the averments made in the claim petition.

Further, contention was taken that the driver of the

offending lorry was not possessing valid and effective

5

driving licence to drive the said vehicle that the owner of

the offending lorry had not secured valid permit and

fitness certificate to ply the same on road and the same

amounts to violation of the policy conditions. On these

set

of

objections,

the

first

respondent-Insurance

Company prayed for dismissal of the claim petition.

The Tribunal based on the rival contentions

formulated the following issues:

1.

“Whether the petitioner proves that, he has

sustained grievous injuries in the road

traffic accident that occurred on 07.03.2014

at about 9.15 a.m, while petitioner was

riding his motor Hero Honda motor cycle

bearing Reg.No.KA-50-H-663, near Essar

Petrol

Bunk,

D.B.Pura-Bangalore

road,

Kasaba Hobli, D.B.Pura Taluk, Bangalore

Rural District, due to rash and negligent

driving of the lorry bearing Reg.No.HR-38-P-

5918 by its driver?

2.

Whether the petitioner is entitled for the

compensation as claimed? If so, to what

amoun