.$§?§;;§' i N IN THE HIGH comm oe KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE, omen THIS THE 25?" DAY 01:' MAY 2011 Q » BEFORE _ THE HONBLE l\/IRJUSTICEJ SUBHASH MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL~~NO.&1G_362/20'05 BETVVEEN: The New India Assurance Co.Lid., No/ll/2A, 2B, 13" Floor, Nithyanandanagar, Nayand-ahalli = Bangalore --~ 560 039 - ; WV " Represented by its Divisional lV_;'_ana~gr:3r:" _ Divisional Office IV, No.52, 1§i..F_lo.oI",._ 'l Vinay Complex, VE§.1fiiVll~E1S road', Basavanagudi, ._ V . _ Bangalore - 56Q"Of3«:l."=.v---';--_V V .. APPELLANT (By Sri. Aelv..__) AND: 1. Sri. Ramle:sh'~ V ._ Aged about 40 years" ~ $373 sari. Doddegowda 'A « liesiding _a't Bangle V Sulikere _PoSt,----.Kengeri Hobli . 'Bangalore S'or.;ith Taluk. Szfi. B_abu;~V'Major .V S/0.. Sri. Basha AA R/at-EX?o.298, 11"? Cross, Vinobanagar, K. G . Halli * «Bangalore -. 560 045. .. RESPONDENTS
il3y_ Sint.Bhushani Kumar, Adv. for R1:
‘ “Service of notice to R2 held sufficient)
*5} .
“\’:$~'”
4
ix’)
2
This l\/i.F.A. is filed under Section. 173(1) of MV Act
the judgment and award dated 3.8.05 passed~«~~—inV.___MX’,C
No.34?/O3 on the file of The I431 Addl. Judge 81 Merriher, i»i_A€”fi*;–~.e
Court of Small Causes, Bangaiore, SCCH NQ_._lG~–,._ ax§farding”–« _
compensation of Rs.57,21lGO/’ — with inte_rest__@ 6% 1?¥’;A..j frern’ Athe V
date of petition till deposit.
This Appeal coming on for, ll€E1l’ll’l.\§_§””£.l”1,lS dagasplthe GO.U’}”J[V.’~.h
delivered the following:
This appeal is by the itinsnrei:.l7q:ue_stilmsing the liability as
ordered by the Tribfqhal in;_’ dated 3.8.2005
on the file of M._A’.,T
2. Respondent’;~ elairnan’t.sGnght’v.i0rieenipensation of Rs.3
lakhs for thelnilad accident that occurred
on 29.10.2lCO2.._ appreciation of the evidence
has awarded lC’eInpensatiQn'<0:f Rs.57,400/– with interest. As
'against:"3'«:. said" «-….award, the Claimant had filed
Vl'.\":VA.l:T.xV':'?xV.'NQ.8»4l;'4;?'2(jC)5._ seeking enhancement of compensation.
Thiseotlrt haaenhaneed the compensation, however, the same
is subjelet ptdreslilt of this appeal.
3. li:VV__t3his ease, the insurer has questioned the award
it «.insefar as the liahiiity of the insurer is concerned on the grennd
–..that,lT?the driver of the auto rickshaw i.e., offending vehicle had
licence tn drive light rnotor vehicle and he did net had the
6. Hawever ii is held Lhai thé if1SU.I’EfI’ may pay and ésccover
the compensatien including the enhanced c0mpen$a’iaiC:n”L:’frém
the owner of the Vehicle in the sama proceédings.
the appeal is allowed. . M
The amount in deposit be transf§:rr¢<_:1Ath_c:- Tribunal. A'
~.__1'».; "«:£;§§g