THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 01.06.2024 PASSED IN MVC NO.4463/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE XXIII ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE, MACT, BENGALURU SCCH-25 AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.1,88,200/- WITH INTEREST AT 6 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL DATE OF DEPOSIT.

THIS APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED ON 14.01.2026 COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT THIS DAY, P SREE SUDHA J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA

CAV JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the appellant/Insurance Company under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, to set aside the judgment and award dated 01.06.2024 passed in MVC No.4463/2020 on the file of the XXIII, Additional Small causes judge, Bengaluru.

Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for respondent No.1. The ranks of the parties are retained as per tribunal for the sake of convenience.

Injured claimant met with an accident on 27.08.2019 and filed claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.10 lakhs. The tribunal considering the entire evidence on record, granted an amount of Rs.1,88,178/- along with interest at the interest of 6% p.a., from the date of petition till realization.

Aggrieved by the said order, this appeal is filed by the appellant in which it is contended that the tribunal erred in considering respondent No.1 as a Loader-Unloader in Trailer bearing Reg.No.KA-11-TA-3492. In spite of specific admission of the claimant that he is an employee of Sri. Chamundeshwari Sugar Factory, K.M.Doddi (Bharathinagar), Maddur Taluk, Mandya District and he ought to have been considered as a gratuitous passenger in a goods vehicle.

The Insurance Company filed this appeal and contended that the tribunal erred in fixing liability on the Insurance company and the tribunal ought to have absolved the Insurance Company to pay the liability. The claim petition is not maintainable under Motor Vehicles Act as he is a loader/unloader and he should have filed it under Employees' Compensation Act. In spite of positive evidence, that they have insured only a tractor and not a trailer, in which respondent No.1 was travelling, the Tribunal erred in making the appellant liable to pay the compensation. There is delay of 3 days in filing the complaint. The eye witness was examined as PW4, but he did not file any complaint to the police, though he witnessed the accident. He has not taken respondent No.1 to the hospital. His behavious is contrary to the normal human behavior and it is to be discarded as unreliable. Respondent No.1 is not an employee of the Respondent No.2/employer and hence without any evidence on their part, Tribunal ignored their defence. Therefore, the Insurance Company requested to set aside the order passed by the Tribunal.

The manner of accident shows that on 27.08.2019 while petitioner was travelling on a trailer bearing reg.No.KA-11-TA-3492 attached to the tractor bearing No. KA-15-T-9322 loading mud from Gurudevarahalli towards Chikkarinakere near C.A.Kere Village, Maddur Taluk, Mandya District, the driver of the said tractor driven it in a rash and negligent manner and suddenly severed the tractor towards the left side of the said road. As a result, petitioner fell down from the trailer and suffered grevious injuries. He was admitted in the hospital as an inpatient for 4 days and underwent surgery. The petitioner stated that he was a coolie, (loader and unloader), under the respondent No.1 and was getting wages of Rs. 15,000 per month i.e. Rs.500 per day.

The K.M.Doddi Police have registered a case against the driver of the Tractor and Trailer in Cr.No.192/2019 offence punishable under sections 279 and 337 of IPC. Learned counsel for respondent No.1 is owner and respondent No.2 is insurer of the offending vehicle. Both of them filed separate written statements. Respondent No.1 admitted the ownership of the trailer and tractor but stated that they insured them with Respon