-: 1 :-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE B.V.NAGARATHNA

AND

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

M.F.A. No.11792/2012 (MV)

BETWEEN:

1.

K.A. KUTTAPPA

S/O. LATE ACHAPPA,

AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS

2.

SMT. K.K. SUDHA,

W/O. K.A. PUTTAPPA,

AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,

BOTH ARE R/AT KAVADI VILLAGE,

AMMATHI, VIRAJPET TALUK,

KODAGU DISTRICT – 571 218.

... APPELLANTS

(BY SRI SARAT CHANDRA BIJAI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.

M.U. BOPPANNA

S/O. UTTAPPA,

AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS,

RESIDING AT NALLURE VILLAGE,

BALELE, VIRAJPET TALUK,

KODAGU DISTRICT – 571 218.

2.

I.P. MANDANNA

S/O. I.C. POONACHA,

AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS,

KAIKERE VILLAGE, GONIKOPPE,

VIRAJPET TALUK,

KODAGU DISTRICT – 571 218.

3.

THE MANAGER,

ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,

-: 2 :-

BADSHA BUILDING,

VIRAJPET,

KODAGU DISTRICT – 571 218.

... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI SACHIN B.S., ADVOCATE FOR R-1;

SRI NAVEEN V.R., ADVOCATE FOR R-2;

SRI O. MAHESH, ADVOCATE FOR R-3)

*****

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE

JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:02.06.2012 PASSED IN MVC

NO.9/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL

JUDGE, MACT, VIRAJPETE, DISMISSING THE CLAIM PETITION

FOR COMPENSATION.

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,

NAGARATHNA J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-

J U D G M E N T

Though this appeal is listed for admission, with the

consent of learned counsel for both the parties, it is heard

finally.

2.

Appellants are the parents of the deceased –

Goutham. Being aggrieved by the dismissal of the claim

petition by judgment and award dated 02.06.2012 filed by

them in MVC.No.9/2011 by the Sr. Civil Judge and MACT at

Virajpet (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal for the

sake of convenience) the claimants have preferred this

appeal.

3.

The parties shall be referred to in terms of

their status before the Tribunal.

-: 3 :-

4.

It is the case of the claimants that on

14.08.2009 at about 11.15 am, Goutham, their son was

traveling as a pillion rider on a motor cycle bearing No.KA-

03-EA-9444 near Bittangala Village. The respondent was

the rider of the vehicle and he drove the same in a rash

and negligent manner. As a result, the motor cycle dashed

against a bridge at Bittangala Village. The rider and pillion

rider fell down from motor cycle. The rider got injured on

his hands and pillion rider Goutham, fell from the motor

cycle got seriously injured on his head and arms and later

succumbed to the same. Contending that they lost their

son in a road traffic accident, they filed the claim petition

seeking compensation on various leads.

5.

The claim petition was filed U/s 163A of the

Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the

Act’ for the sake of convenience). In response to the claim

petition, the first respondent appeared and contended that

the deceased – Goutham was riding the vehicle and that

respondent No.1 was the pillion rider and that the rider

was responsible for his death and therefore, sought for

dismissal of the claim petition.

-: 4 :-

6. Similarly, the Insurance Company appeared and

filed its statement of objections contending that Goutham

being rider of the vehicle was himself negligent in causing

the accident and therefore, sought for dismissal of the

petition.

7.

On the basis of the rival pleadings, the Tribunal

framed the following issues for its consideration:-

“1. Whether the petitioner proves that on

14.08.2009 at about 11.15 am, while the

son of the petitioner was traveling as a

pillion

rider

motor

cycle

bearing

Registration

No.KA-03EA-9444

near

Bittangala village, the respondent No.1

being the rider of the said vehicle had

drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent

manner having lost control over the said

vehicle and dashed against the bridge an