MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.103246 OF 2014 (MV)

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 22.08.2014, PASSED IN MVC.NO.125/2010, ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL MACT., HONNAVAR, (ITINERARY COURT AT BHATKAL) AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.4,59,200/- ALONG WITH THE INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 9% P.A FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION & ETC.

THIS MFA HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR JUDGMENT ON 29.04.2026 AND COMING FOR PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI

CAV JUDGMENT

Challenging judgment and award dated 22.08.2014 passed by Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Honnavar, (Itinerary Court at Bhatkal) (for short ‘Tribunal’) in MVC no.125/2010, this appeal is filed.

2. Sri RR Mane, learned counsel for appellant (‘NICL’, for short) submitted appeal was by insurer challenging award passed by tribunal on ground of maintainability.

3. Sri JS Shetty, learned counsel for respondents no.1 to 4 - claimants and Sri GN Raichur learned counsel for respondent no.7 – United India Insurance Co., Ltd.

4. It was submitted, at 10:15 pm on 19.12.1996, Ishwar Sankusa Naik, a petty businessman was going in Lorry no.KA-25/4861 (insured with respondent no.7 – ‘UIICL’, for short), from Bhatkal to Kundapur along with two gunny bags of coconut, when driver of Lorry no.KL-8/G-8955 (insured with NICL), drove it in rash and negligent manner and dashed against claimant's Lorry. In accident, Ishwar Naik sustained grievous injuries and despite treatment at Government Hospital, Bhatkal and KMC Hospital, Manipal, he did not recover fully and sustained loss of earning capacity. Therefore, he filed MVC no.555/2001 against owner and insurer of both Lorries under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (‘MV Act’ for short). Same was allowed awarding compensation of ₹8,77,000/- as follows:

5. It was submitted, tribunal apportioned negligence between two Lorries at 50% each. Aggrieved, UIICL filed MFA no.7973/2002 before this Court, in which claimant filed MFA CROB no.317/2004. During pendency, claimant – Ishwar Naik died on 29.09.2005. And on 18.06.2010, while disposing of Appeal/Cross-Objection, this Court observed:

(i) Appeal filed by Insurance company MFA no.7973 of 2002 is dismissed.

(ii) Cross-Objection no.317 of 2004 is also dismissed.

(iii) However, liberty is reserved to the legal representatives of the claimants to prosecute their claim if they choose to do so in a manner known to law.

(iv) The High Court registry is directed to transmit the amount deposited by the insurance company at the time of preferring this appeal to the Tribunal for being paid to the claimants forthwith.

(v) Parties to bear their own costs.

6. In terms of liberty granted, legal representatives filed present claim petition in MVC no.125/2010. Same was opposed by NICL on ground that claim petition filed on same cause of action earlier had ended in award, which was complied by it and another claim would not be maintainable. It was also contended earlier award was by assessing 100% disability, leaving no scope for further award even in case of death of injured-claimant. However, overruling said objections, tribunal p