North West Karnataka … vs Gourabai & Ors on 1 May, 2009

                                                                                 REPORTABLE

                     IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
                         CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION


                          CIVIL APPEAL NO.3171 OF 2009
                                (Arising out of S.L.P.(C) No.15079 of 2007)


NORTH WEST KARNATAKA RD. TRANSPORT CORP.                          Appellant(s)


                             Versus

GOURABAI & ORS.                                                   Respondent(s)



                          JUDGMENT

Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.

Heard.

Leave granted.

Challenge in this appeal is to the order passed by the learned Single

Judge of the Karnataka High Court dismissing the appeal filed by the appellant.

Challenge in the said appeal was to an award made by the Motor Accident

Claims Tribunal No. VII, Bijapur (in short MACT). An award of Rs.2,59,400/-

was made. The main contention of the appellant before the MACT as well as

before the High Court was that the deceased did not sustain any injury in any

accident involving the bus of the

…2/-

-2-

corporation. Reference was made to the evidence of the doctor, who had

admitted the deceased to the hospital, that the deceased had suffered head injury

due to fall from the height of 8 to 10 feet of his own house. Though this was

specifically stated in the written statement, the MACT and the High court

brushed aside the same stating that there was indirect admission about the

deceased having sustained injury in vehicular accident. The effect of the

evidence of the doctor and exhibit R-1 does not appear to have been looked into

by the MACT and the High Court. MACT did not place reliance on the

document R-1 on the ground that the brother of the injured stated that he did

not know what was written in the document and his signature was taken on one

page. This conclusion overlooks from the fact that a doctor will not take a

signature on a piece of paper mentioning something which is not correct.

Exhibit R-1 establishes beyond the shadow of doubt that the injuries sustained

were not on account of any vehicular accident. That being so, the MACT and

…3/-

-3-

the High Court were not justified in making any award. The order of the MACT

and High Court stands set aside.

The appeal is accordingly, allowed.

………………….J.

(Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT)

…………………J.

(ASOK KUMAR GANGULY)

New Delhi,
May 01, 2009