IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 09TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2009"'-----,T BEFORE . THE HONBLE MRSJUSTICE3 2 . M.F.A.NO.7718 /206'4u»m"., V' ' BETWEEN: A 'T Smt. G.D.Jayashree, D/ 0 G.N.Divayanancla Kumar Aged about 25 years, R/at No.48, 6*" Cross, V Channammallakere, _ Banashankari 2?"? Stage,__ ' - Banga10re--70. ' " . . .APPEI..LANT (By Spit: Chowdappa D N} 1. sxf;_.M.sri'§=xsy::sa;:--. S.,j'_'0 Ivianikyéim. . 'MédC5.1'«_ 111.aé§<2. ---------- ' , Lorry Qwfn"L'..xf and V "l'rar134;3G3j't.'~C0:1traC1,0r, 50 feet, " . Wa1aja,* jj Iflorth' arc=§)1'. District, Tamil Nad L1 . V' The Branch Manager. ' Uriited India Insurance Co. Ltd, Bramch Office, 35/J, NB'? Road, Gandhi Chowk, Ranipet, North arcot 1.')1si:rict. Tami} Nad u, 3. SI'i.T.KriSl':11amurthy S/o 'I'himmara_ya Setty Major In age. R/ at No. 54. Timber Yard layout. Mysore Road. Banga10re~20. 4. The Branch Manager. Oriental 11-'1Su:*anc:e C0. - Ltd., N0534/45, I 2"?' Floor. EZSSAR Mansions, R.V.Roa<:i, Basavanagudi, _ Bangalo re -- 4 . V ....' RESPQNDENTS [By Sri: R Raj ugopalarr Sri.B.S.UmeSI1 for R4. R1.-'.SVd.}'V'"V * Tms ax/11:«é.z\':Er_L,Er3i;' 7r3"(if)'_;.QE 'léqixk ACT, AGAINST THE JUDG'£3i?3/iE2§£'f__. A1\}"D' AWARD "DATED 15.07.2004 PASSED IN Txrwigi NO,2?2'/.2002-ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE 'oN'.*)._'& 'c'.J.M., & M.A.C.T., KOLAR, PARTLY v A1.1.ow1N]jo~_ "1~..T}»«1E' CLAIM PETETION FOR coMPENS;n;TITR,.»wS To SET ASEDE THE FINDING rAST*EN'1No THE LEASILITY ON THE 1ST .RESPoNE.EN":~=.1 HCREIN. ._ " .__V.'I'T1i:§§'\~v..I\/Iiiaigr' ooming on for HEARING on this day, the court de1_1'Ve1'}€;j:ciTV' we following: -- JUDGMENT
H x a;:»pve:11 is filed by the injured claimant challenging
the correct.1’1eSS of the judgment and award made in
Mvc.No.272/2002 dated 15.7.2004 by the MACT, Kolar.
9.
//2
2. The fat’rt.~:s oi the case are that the injured claimant on
29.6.1997 st.:siai:’1ed injuries in a road traffic accident.
Contencling that she has suffered permanent d1sabiltit;rt~on
account of E.1’§L:’ ;1t:cident.al injuries. she had _
petition seeking; compensation on various he_ad~s.–.._
3. After st:i”vit’w;r of notice from t11e:_.sa:n1e”tzlras”‘«
contested by the respondent Nos.2 &/-1 herein. ” ‘
4. In support of her case th’e_ciaiman’i: eiiipdence as
PW.2 and §_{(‘)l mat~het__ certain .d’do'”cu_rI1entsl;”‘ While the
respondents ‘d r’1o*tX1ei..inaany evidence.
5. On the ‘§.=;t.sé~s”~ol”-t;he–,niaterial on record, the Tribunal
awarded (;()l1’;1_V1″[}t-itif-iE:tl.l(i’lf}:Olf~’llVRS.45,000/- with interest at 6%
p.a_” the Eli-:lVt.'(‘«_Q_f”pClZilLlOI} till realization, but however,
‘t~1r1’e._dla1″‘-atégility on the owner of the Vehicle, by taking
l’ri’3:te..loflv’tli€’p’cl’2’£ip:.i”xt’}’12at the claimant had stated in the cause
titleaof the”t5lz.:inz ;>et:’1,ion that the policy was valid between
ll”‘.4f_:28.;9:1997 to 27.4.1998 and whereas the accident had
.l Cccu’rred on B9AE:5419g? i.e.. prior to the date of the policy.
“Therefore, mt: lnstirarice company was absolved of its
ta»,
liability. Ci'”::–..1iii’é1’1gir1g the said Judgment and Award the
claimant has pr<.=i"erreci this appeal. i
6. I have in-‘a1″ci ihe learned counsel for the appeila–i.t’*«an.d
the learned c’.’om1sc?i {or the respondent/ insurance ‘
and perused 311:: 1’i’iai.erial on record, ..
‘7. Counsei for the appellant
respondent/iiisiiraricre company idid :ioi;._ furnish
authenticated cnpy of the p’c1i}:y _beforeti’ie Tribunal.
However, th.e:'<: was "typograplh'ica1elzerror the claim
petition. accident. occurred on 29.6.19? but in
fact thevllpolivy between 28.4.1997 to 27.4.1998
and the sanilii: ewidelricedll by way of production of a copy of
ll"–v.Athe-tlpoieicyas ai<ici'i'i.'ional evidence in this appeal and
p_itl'1.erefore,_:talE{i.:;ig.ginto consideration the said fact, the liability
niayllllbe _fasii.§g:e2Ail§:c.i on the insurance company. He further
submits 'tjhai 'size award of Compensation is meager which
"requi~res €1'1lT1kli"1i'C?§"l'i61'1l in this appeal.
. 8., " ''AOn ;)ei":.is;:l of the material on record, it is no doubt
"'eVident that in the cause titie of the claim petition the
validity of t.l'ie policy is shown as 28.9.1997 to 2%.-41.1998
:/¥~
the policy was \ra.lic.I. the liability ought to be fastened on the
insurance Con'1p:.-my. Taking note of the said decision in
the absence oi" élltz' inolicy being produced by K
company l)el'ni-v the Tribunal and on the V'
additional €\='i{lt"'il(?€' produced in this "appeal,.;l.a'm ofvthefl
considered View that the liability fastened on the ow11e"r;_.W"as'.'.
not correct am? instiead the insurance company, narnely the
second respo11der1i.. is liable tosatisfy the awards
11. As far as the enha_nL:.e_rnent’~.ofl[s::_o–mpensation is
concerned, it §.;.~j_; 15.1′ ihat. there is no–.l’pern5lanent disability as
such and il’1l;i:5.j;=.; s{§i.nl1 oi°Rs.45,–OOO/~ has been awarded as
the oveV1″‘A_all 9.0;:3;$cais:ai:ionc;a.__ However, I find that in respect of
future mcidéltrm e;:p.ensesl”‘*also interest has been awarded
which »is not .._ii..1:l~;if”and broper. Learned counsel for the
l V’ .Aap1;iellian¢;, l’;a\ar<\vel1 'su'bn1its that in View of the injuries on the
'face., V conib ,.
:Er.i_i():1 may be awarded on the head of loss of
“:?i1ai’1’i«ag’e«aj_>:ig.Js;’;e€§1us. Taking the same into consideration a
sun’:-. of..__’R.>:–§l”{‘f},é}{}O/~ is awarded on the said head. While
‘V..,calculating; lllli.’ es;-il’1ie the insurance company shall take into
consideratézm Liie fact that 6% interest on future medical
‘expenses wzis gzlso 21w’a:’ded by the tribunal and therefore,
.. mthe same n’*;:”1}=-* be deducted and the balance compensation
. V F;
Zia
«It
with iI’1t€l’£’.’I~SI Imzy be deposited which shall be withdrawn by
the appellzmr.
12. For {ho ;-‘:£'(‘)rcsaid reasons. the appeal”i’s~–
part in thv ;.:’:.><;vc {'.C'I'I}'1S.
é
KVN*