Karnataka State Road Transport … vs Sri Basavararadhya S/O Late … on 1 August, 2008

 . %2.%s;&. cimsdragngkatashya
_  T  _ '_  years, S/{J 'Sri. Basavaradhya

*   "S$of1iashekaradhya, 32 ymrs
  Basavaradhya

1 L' L' .1 ' ~ Yishwakazirxa Colony

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BAN(:,1a:,0RE
DATED THIS THE 13" DAY 09 AUGUsfI:2§OS %I L  % 
BEFORE:           _

THE H()N'BLE MR.   %
MI§§1;§1,LA__1;lEOUS F1123: mm} %
BETWEEN:        

Karnalaka Slate Ruud V  ..

Transport C0rpo1'm;iOx§"_««._ ;:~~-  " ,, 
Central Office, K.  9

Bangalore,   
Manugir1gDit%;_c:1qI--   « .  A?PELLANT

(By Shri. D. v;;a,gx..ma,; 

M394

1.  years
S/o--.I.ai;«¢« Sizafgznvukfazadya

VT  Resident of



travelling in a bus, belonging to the appellanE;::'slieiii:ll1li§d 

inside the bus, on account of the vehielebeing  in   T. it 

negligent manner and on ueeeunt  
sulfered, she was admitted at  
complaint at a later point  'treatment, it
transpires that she had   therefore
lodged 8. elaimevpetitien, tag ,'!.l.ile  had died as
a result of   lxeving accepted the claim,
has    with interest. It is this

which is' tizider chelleiige  l' I ' ' "J

A. CoiiiI'sel""tbr the appellant would submit that the

  that there was an alleged accident involving a

  the appellant and that the deceased Sarujammu

 suiiteiiéied injury to her left leg and subsequently died is not

   The appellant had contended before the Tribunal that

   deceased was not at all travelling in that has on the alleged

A V "date and at the alleged time when the accident is said to have

3



was a false claim is an indication that the Tribunal 

the very cbjections that are sought [(1 be urged  

been raised before the Tribunal. Therefcre,   ;  

interference insofar as the finding of  
and the injuries sulfered by   
further circumstance ihifl   hait  to the
injuries as a reseit efi deveiopcd is a

circumstanee tfhaitfis  wound certificate. It

is _ sed as a chronic diabetic
was retlected   "ievcund certificate. The further

d()cu§i:<.in_ts {minced ti, gtmw that the deceased had sustained

as "an impatient and her admission in Hospital else

A  developments which were directly retatabte to

V .V   the injuries suflered. The aliegetiun that there

it iwas--4_.ccliliusiun between the claimants, the appellant and the

'   authorities is 3 wild and held allegation, which is whelly

  without having been substantiated. It is on the mere

suspicion of the appetlant that such allegations ate made. The

5



was incumbent on the respondents In t:stabIis}2.':.%Vi.h'i:a;;V:A
circumstance which the rcsptyndanlsiifive'     AV 
quite possible that the awamx ;.,.d%di.g;as g%.a-§sm 0;-,.,a;,;¢,m»
other than the alleged sn_gm'es   5;; am pg:

of the respondents  '~...nu£   crucial
circumstance and flu:  in pmccoding

to auccpt the U!'§:Vii'i'}'i'::l:IJ3!.¢ 'i'..i€.3I:I  {Ed 'a'.a§;vc said lacuna.

Aw;-.:;§gg;%y,L  & The award of the
Tnbunaiss 3...»; 3553;} in deposit is to be refunded to
meamgfimt  %V  .A 4' 

 .....  

Judgg