IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

DHARWAD BENCH

DATED THIS THE 11^th DAY OF JUNE 2021

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI

MFA NO 24514 OF 2012 (MV)

BETWEEN

SHRIRAM GEN. INS.CO.LTD.,

K C ROAD, BELLARY NOW

REP.BY ITS AUTHORIZEDSIGNATORY E-8,

EPIP, RIICO, SITAPUR, JAIPUR, RAJASTAN,

...APPELLANT

(BY SRI. NAGARAJ C KOLLOORI, ADV.)

AND

1. SRI.MIRJA ISAMAIL S/O. ABDUL KHADAR KHAN,

AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC: ASST. ACCOUNT OFFICER IN KPC,

R/O: H.NO.6 TYPE 9/1 KPC COLONY, GANGESHGUDI,

TQ: JOIDA, DIST: UTTAR KANNADA.

2. SRI. SANDEEP S RANE,

AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS,

R/O: RAMANAGAR, TQ: JOIDA,

DIST: UTTAR KANNADA.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.SHIVARAJ BALLOLLI, ADV FOR R1;

R2 SERVED)

THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE MV ACT

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 28.06.2011 PASSED IN MVC.

NO.74/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER, ADDL. MACT, YELLAPUR,

SITTING AT HALIYAL AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.3,95,384/- WITH

INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 6% PA FROM THE DATE OF THE PETITION TILL

THE DATE OF PAYMENT.

THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT,

DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

2

JUDGMENT

Though this appeal is listed for admission, with the

consent of the learned counsel on both sides, the appeal

is taken up for disposal.

2.

This appeal is preferred against the judgment

and award dated 28.06.2011 passed by the Member, Addl.

MACT, Yellapur in MVC.No.74/2010.

3.

Brief facts as stated leading to this appeal are

that

the

claimant

while

traveling

in

a

car

bearing

registration

No.MH-04/AW-7818

from

Dandeli

to

Ganeshgudi met with an accident near Usoda cross on

Ganeshgudi Dandeli road with lorry bearing registration

No.KA-22/B-638 driven by its driver came in a rash and

negligent manner. As a result claimant sustained grievous

injuries and was admitted to Government hospital, Dandeli

as inpatient for a period of 11 days. Even after taking

treatment and spending money, he sustained permanent

physical disability. Therefore, he filed claim petition under

3

Section 166 of the M.V. Act seeking compensation from the

owner and insurer of the offending lorry.

4.

On issuance of notice, respondent No.1-owner

was

placed

ex-parte.

The

respondent

No.2-insurance

company entered appearance and filed objections opposing

the claim petition both on quantum as well as negligence.

5.

Based on pleadings, Tribunal framed following

issues:

1.

Whether the petitioner proves that he

sustained bodily injuries in a road traffic

accident on 30.05.2010 at about 2.45

p.m. near Usoda Cross on Ganeshgudi-

Dandeli road due to rash and negligent

driving of the lorry bearing reg. No.KA.

22/B 638 by its driver?

2.

Whether the petitioner is entitled for

compensation? If so, what is the quantum

and from whom?

3.

What order or award?

6.

In order to establish the case, claimant himself

was examined as PW1. Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.61 were marked. On

4

behalf of respondents, no oral and documentary evidence

was laid.

7.

On consideration, Tribunal answered Issue No.1

in the affirmative and issue No. 2 partly in affirmative and

allowed the claim petition by awarding total compensation

of Rs.3,95,384/- with interest and directed respondent

No.2 to deposit the compensation awarded by the tribunal.

8.

Sri

Nagaraj

C

Kollori,

learned

counsel

for

appellant- insurance company submitted that claimant was

46 years of age and working as Assistant Accounts Officer

in KPC at Ganeshgudi and earning salary of Rs.26,903/-

per month. Though claimant continued to be in job as

admitted during his cross examination, tribunal assessed

the compensation towards loss of future earnings in a sum

of Rs.3,35,794/- which required to be disallowed.

9.

On the other hand Sri.Shivaraj Ballolli, learned

counsel appearing for respondent No.1-claimant submits

that,

tribunal

by

taking

into

consideration

disability

suffered

by

claimant,

awarded

compensat