1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD

MFA No.2001 OF 2011(MV)

C/W

MFA No.716 OF 2011(MV)

IN MFA 2001/2011

BETWEEN:

Sri. Mohan,

Son of Nagaraj,

Now aged about 25 years,

R/at No.50, Byanna Building,

Byrasandra, Opposite Swetha Bar,

Bangalore-93.

… Appellant

(By Sri.D.Manmohan., Advocate)

AND:

1.

Sri. Murali,

S/o Sri. Thimmareddy,

Aged major,

R/at No.1216, Dommasandra,

Behind Majadra, Anekal Taluk,

Bangalore-5621125.

2.

The Bajaj Allaianz General

Insurance Company Limited,.

Office at No.34, TBR Tower,

By the side of

Bangalore Stock Exchange,

& Jain College,

2

New Mission Road,

By its Manager.

... Respondents

(By Smt. H.R.Renuka., Advocate for R2:

Notice to R1 is D/W v/o dated:12.04.2011)

This MFA is filed under Section 173(1) of MV Act,

against the Judgment and Award dated:06.09.2010 passed

in MVC No.1667/2008 on the file of the VIII Additional

Judge and Member MACT, Court of Small Causes,

Bangalore,

partly

allowing

the

claim

petition

for

compensation and seeking enhancement of compensation.

IN MFA 716/2011

BETWEEN:

Bajaj Allianz General

Insurance Company Limited,.

Office at No.31, TBR Tower,

By the side of

Bangalore Stock Exchange,

& Jain College,

New Mission Road,

Represented by its

Assistant Vice President (claims).

…Appellant

(By Smt. H.R.Renuka, Advocate)

AND:

1.

Mohan,

S/o Shri. Nagaraj,

Now aged about 25 years,

R/at No.50, Byanna Building,

Byrasandra, Opposite Swetha Bar,

Bangalore-93.

2.

Murali,

S/o Shri. Thimmareddy,

3

Adult,

R/a No.1216, Dommasandra,

Behind Majadra, Anekal Taluk,

Bangalore-5621125.

…Respondents

(By Sri. D.Manmohan, Advocate for R1:

R2 served and unrepresented)

This MFA is filed under Section 173(1) of MV Act,

against the Judgment and Award dated:06.09.2010 passed

in MVC No.1667/2008 on the file of the VIII Additional

Judge and Member MACT, Court of Small Causes,

Bangalore, awarding a compensation of Rs.6,39,800/- with

interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of petition till deposit in

Court.

These MFAs coming on for admission, this day, this

Court, delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

MFA No.2001/2011 is filed by the claimant

whereas MFA No.716/2011 is filed by the Insurance

Company under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles

Act, (for short, ‘the Act’) being aggrieved by the

judgment and award dated 06.09.2010 passed by the

MACT, Bangalore City in MVC No.1667/2008. Since

the challenge is to the same judgment, both the

appeals are clubbed together, heard and common

judgment is being passed.

4

2. The learned counsel appearing for the

insurance

company

has

raised

the

following

contentions:

Firstly, the accident occurred due to rash and

negligent riding of the rider of the motorcycle bearing

registration No.KA-03/ES-8307 and the driver of the

tempo bearing registration No.KA-51/4690 was not

involved in the accident, the Tribunal is not justified in

holding that the driver of the tempo was negligent in

causing the accident.

Secondly, as per the medical records produced

by the claimant at Ex.P17 it was mentioned as ‘bike

skidded and hit by a truck, rider expired on spot and

he was riding pillion’.

Thirdly, he relied on Ex.R7 which is issued by

NIMHANS, wherein it is mentioned as ‘RTA - self fall

from two wheeler’.

5

Fourthly, in the Medico Legal Register issued by

St.John’s hospital, it is mentioned as ‘bike skidded and

hit by a truck’. Therefore, it is a self fall and there is

no negligence on the part of the driver of the tempo.

Fifthly, the claimant has claimed that he was a

pillion rider in the motorcycle but the Tribunal in the

connected matter has given a finding that the

claimant herein was riding the motorcycle. Therefore,

there is contradiction in the f