1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF JULY 2018

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT

M.F.A.No.2972/2010(MV)

BETWEEN:

The Manager,

New India Assurance Co. Ltd.,

Branch Office, II Floor,

A1-Zubeda Buildings, 3^rd Cross,

Nehru Nagar, Shimoga.

Now represented by its

Regional Manager,

New India Assurance Co. Ltd.,

Regional Office, 2-B, Unity

Building Annexe, P. Kalinga Rao Road,

Bengaluru – 560 027.

...Appellant

(By Sri. A. N. Krishnaswamy, Advocate)

AND:

1. M. K. Ramesh,

S/o M. K. Keshavaiah,

Now aged about 52 years,

Advocate & Agriculturist,

R/o Marle village & post,

Chikmagalur Tq., & District.

2. Ziaudeen, S/o Abdul Sattar,

Now aged about 31 years,

Driver of lorry, R/o Sulebailu village,

Urugadur Post, Shimoga Dist.

2

3. Kareem Khan, S/o Late Usman Khan,

Now aged about 78 years,

Owner of lorry, R/o Durgamma Keri,

Sulebailur Village, Urugadur Post,

Shimoga Dist.

...Respondents

(By Sri. K. Venkategowda, Advocate for R1;

V/o dated 3.7.13, notice to R2 & R3 held sufficient)

This MFA is filed under Section 173(1) of the Motor

Vehicles Act against the judgment and award dated

19.12.2008 passed in MVC No.604/2007 on the file of

District Judge and Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court –II &

Member, MACT-IV, Chikmagalur, awarding a compensation

of Rs.1,38,000/- with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of

petition till realization.

This MFA is coming on for final hearing, this day, the

Court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T

This appeal by the Insurance Company challenges

the judgment and award dated 19.12.2008 whereby

MACT-IV Chikmagalur has allowed MVC No.604/2007

awarding a compensation of Rs.1,38,000/- with 6%

p.a., interest thereon.

2.

Since the appeal is filed with the delay, a

separate application is filed supported by the affidavit

offering explanation therefor. Although, the objections

3

have been filed by the claimant, after going through the

entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case and

also the explanation offered for the delay, this Court

allows the said application and condons the delay and

the main matter is taken up for consideration on merits.

3.

Brief

facts

of

the

case

are

that

on

02.01.2005, the lorry bearing No.KA-29/1413 because

of the rash and negligent driving, had hit claimant’s

Maruthi Zen car bearing Regn. No.KA-18/MD-4567,

when the car was on the way from Bhramhavara to

Chikmagalur. Owner of the car the contesting

respondent herein had filed a claim petition in MVC

No.604/2007 seeking a compensation of Rs.2,50,000/-

being the amount needed for repairing and restoring the

car to its original position and Rs.40,000/- for the hired

vehicle when his was left in garage for repairs. The

claim petition was resisted by appellant-Insurer by filing

Written Statement.

4

4.

To prove the claim, the claimant had

examined himself as PW.1; he had examined one Mr.

K.S. Venkatesh as PW.2 who had bailed his vehicle in

favour of the claimant, during the interregnum of repair

and

restoration;

he

had

examined

one

Mr.

Dharmegowda as PW.3, to prove that the claimant had

taken loan from him to pay off the repair charges and

other expenses to bailer of the vehicle.

5.

In the evidence of the claimant PW.1, 36

documents came to be marked as Exs.P1 to P36. The

appellant-Insurance

Company

had

examined

one

Mr.K.S. Rajashekar, its Office Assistant as RW.1, in

whose evidence, two documents namely Insurance

Policy and the Terms & Conditions of Insurance came to

be marked as Exs.R1 and R2, respectively.

6.

The Tribunal after looking to the pleadings of

the parties and after weighing evidentiary material both

5

oral and documentary, had made the judgment and

award which are challenged in this appeal.

7.

It is contended in the appeal that the

claimant had avail