-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,

DHARWAD BENCH

DATED THIS THE 4^TH DAY OF AUGUST 2021

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE V. SRISHANANDA

M.F.A. NO.20414/2013

C/W.

M.F.A. NO.20413/2013 (MV)

IN MFA NO.20414 OF 2013

BETWEEN

THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER,

KSRTC, BELLARY DIVISION

OFFICE, SHIRAGUPA ROAD, BELLARY,

THE APPELLANT IS

R/P ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER,

CENTRAL OFFICE SARIGE SADANA,

GULBARGA.

…APPELLANT

(BY SRI.SHIVAKUMAR S BADAWADAGI, ADVOCATE)

AND

1.

SMT.KAPPADI NAGAMMA

W/O NAGAPPA,

AGE:30 YRS, OCC:COLLIE/

HOUSEWIFE, R/O. JOGIKALLU,

TQ:SANDUR.

2.

A CHOUDAPPA S/O. ANJINEYA,

AGE:MAJOR, OCC:DRIVER OF

KSRTC BUS, R/O. KAPPURBASAPPA

NAGAR, DAVANAGERE.

-2-

TQ:DAVANAGERE, DIST:DAVANAGERE

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.C.S.NAGASHETTI, ADVOCATE FOR R2,

NOTICE TO R1 SERVED)

THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF M.V. ACT,

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 28.06.2012 PASSED

IN MVC NO.167/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER MACT, IX

BELLARY

PARTLY

ALLOWING

THE

CLAIM

PETITION

FOR

COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

IN MFA NO.20413 OF 2013

BETWEEN

THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER,

KSRTC, BELLARY DIVISION

OFFICE, SHIRUGUPA ROAD,

BELLALRY. THE APPELLANT

IS R/B ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER,

CENTRAL OFFICE SARIGE SADANA,

GULBARGA.

…APPELLANT

(BY SRI.SHIVAKUMAR S BADAWADAGI, ADVOCATE)

AND

1.

SMT.HULEMMA W/O. HANUMANTHAPPA,

AGE:42 YRS, OCC:COLLIE/HOUSEWIFE,

R/O. JOGIKALLU, TQ:SANDUR.

2.

A CHOUDAPPA S/O. ANJANEYA,

AGE:MAJOR, OCC:DRIVER OF

KSRTC BUS, R/O. KABBURBASAPPA

NAGAR, DAVANAGERE.

TQ:DAVANAGERE, DIST:DAVANAGERE

…RESPONDENTS

(NOTICES TO R1 & R2 SERVED)

THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF M.V. ACT,

SEEKING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL BY SETTING ASIDE THE

JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 28.06.2012 PASSED IN MVC

NO.166/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER MACT, IX BELLARY.

-3-

THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,

COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Though these appeals are listed for admission

today, with the consent of both the parties, they are

taken up for final disposal.

2.

Heard Sri.Shivakumar S Badawadagi, learned

counsel for the appellant and Sri.C.S.Nagashetti, learned

counsel for driver of KSRTC bus in the connected appeal.

3.

KSRTC is in appeals challenging the quantum

and on the ground of contributory negligence of the

owner of the vehicle involved in the accident in respect of

judgment and award in MVC Nos.166/2012 and 167/2012

dated 28.06.2012 on the file of MACT-IX, Ballari

(hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal” for short).

4.

Along

with

these

two

appeals,

MFA

No.20415/2013 was filed challenging the quantum of

-4-

compensation as well as the contributory negligence

attributable to the owner of trax involved in the accident.

The said appeal came to be dismissed for non-

prosecution on 07.02.2019. No steps are taken by KSRTC

to restore the said appeal.

5.

The brief facts, which are necessary for

disposal of these appeals are as under:

Claim petitions came to be filed under Section 166

of Motor Vehicles Act contending that on 16.09.2011, the

claimants were traveling as paid passengers in trax

bearing No.KA-35/7532 and when the said vehicle

reached near Hunse Lake, Govindagiri on Kudligi-Sandur

road at about 3.20 p.m., KSRTC bus bearing No.KA-34/F-

835 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed

against the trax, whereby the inmates of the trax

sustained injuries and were shifted to hospital and they

-5-

took treatment by spending huge money. Therefore, the

claimants sought for awarding suitable compensation.

6.

In pursuance of the notice issued, respondent

No.2 appeared before the Tribunal and filed written

statement denying the claim petition averments. Charge

sheet came to be filed against the driver of KSRTC. Based

on the rival contentions of the parties, the Tribunal raised

necessary issues.

7.

On cumulative consideration of the oral and

documen