High Court Karnataka High Court

Regional Manager National … vs Smt Lakshmamma W/O Late Shivanna on 29 October, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Regional Manager National … vs Smt Lakshmamma W/O Late Shivanna on 29 October, 2010
Author: N.K.Patil And H.S.Kempanna
3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATEB THIS THE 29'"? DAY OF OCTOBER, 2010 

:PRESENT:

THE I-ION'BLE MILJUSTICE N.K.PAT;i ff  *' 

AND  

THE 1-IoN'BLE MR.JUsTIcE7-,H.s.g;i;EMPAN1$m.' VI' '

M.F.A. No. 9f39~:._Vof 2006   

Between:   .  V

Regionai Manager, _. ,  ._ 
National Ins1'1ran'ee"Cd..__, L'tciy':.,x 
Regional Offic-=3,  1',   A
Subhara1n"C9I:i;:>1eXffi.;  "

144,     
Banga1or'e--55O 'OO1.~_"--a_  

.. . Appellant

{By SE11; A_.N.  Syvaaly, Advocate)

A  V Smt'. LaL«kShn1amma,

*W",".0. Late Shivanna,
Now agedvabout 32 years.

 ' V _   Sharhzfiamma,

A' D/Q. Late Shivanna,

  aged about 13 years.

VA   3.__5Ka:m.na Kumar,

S/0. Late Shivanna.
Now aged about 10 yefis.

/ 5-----W---'°'-"*""""""""""""""f

 



Respondents No. 2 8: 3
Herein are minors,

Reptd. By their natural
Guardian mother the

I respondent herein.

All are R/ at. Bagalagunta,
Hesaragatta Road,
Bangalore.

4. Sasalaiah,

S / 0. Siddarangiah.

Major,

R/0. Pemmanahalli, *
Hirehaili Post,   .  V
Urdigere Hobli',a_  V. 1. _V
Turnkur Tasltik "DiST,.I"i«Ct'.:.

... Respondents

[By Sri. Ix/i;'Babt1;pandf1i:Sri."'M}-Munirajii, Advocates for R1 to 3;
R4 served but u'n're.presented_} _ '

This is.fi1ed  3.173(1) of MV Act against the
Judgment and Award datedf 03/03/2006 passed in MVC No.
7715/2004 on the 'file' of the X Addl. SCJ and Member

 V.  Ban.galore" «{S_CC3H--16}, awarding compensation of
_ "\"4..V2I',0O0/-- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition
till paynient  to set aside the same.

 coming on for Hearing this day.

  N.K.-.,I_~A'm*.._V.ft,'de11vered the following:

:JUDGMENT:

it appeal by the Insurer is directed against the

‘impugned judgment and award dated 03/ 03 / 2006 passed in

MVC No. 7715/2004 b he X Additional SCJ and Member,

¢WMM_M_m__w,_,,.,_.,.

Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bangalore {SCCH–16),

(hereinafter referred as ‘ Tribunal’ for short}.

2. The Tribunal by its judgment and

awarded a sum of 34,21,000/– under differentlieads H

interest at 6% per annum from the’ d’a°’te of till -fits;

payment. as against the claim of a

?8,00,000/-. on account of the.__?d’eathA.of.__the_ldece=ase’d s:Sri. ” V

Shivanna , in the road traffic accident. V’

3. In brief, the factsoi .

The c1ai.man’t__ claimant Nos. 2 and 3
are theflrninorx ef_'”c1e_ce.asied Sri. Shivanna and they
have fileda ciairn’epetitioitifoiefolre the Tribunal under section

166 of claimingddlcompensation of ?8,00,000/–, on

‘lacc¢5ut1tte’2’¢f the death” of the deceased in the road traffic

ca.cciidVent.ljcontenlding that, on 22.8.2004 at about 3.30

deceased was going on the left side of the road

wl’ie.nA:’he came infront of Aralikatte road on NH4, at that

it driver of the autorickshaw bearing No.KA–6-A–1997

it Hdrlove the same in a rash and negligent manner and dashed

against the deceased, 0 which he sustained grievous

Tribunal is liable to be modified on the ground that the

vehicle in question was not involved in the accident.

therefore, the liability fastened on the _

contrary to the docurnentary evidence av’ailablelVon’filer_l ”

and also that the quantum of com;D’en’sati.o’n._la\.vardeti:_’

by the Tribunal is on higher”?VS-ide and ~ thereforegit«.r1e–eds

to be modified.

6. As le’alriied._.___£counsel for the
claimants, substantiated the
by the Tribunal.

“the Tribunal after assessing

the oral and docu1r’ientarv evidence available on file, has

awarded’nlthercornpensation under different heads and

and reasonable and therefore, it does

V _ not call foririterference.

as 7,” ll After careful perusal of the original record

available on file at threadbare, including the impugned

judgrnent and award passed by the Tribunal, we do not

find any error of law, less material irregularity as

such committed by the Tribunal in allowing the claim

petition filed by the claimants by awarding reasonable

compensation fastening the liability on the Insi1..I’_efr;V’:’ V.

significant to note after going through

the Insurer before the Tribunal ingltheiilwriltteni

that, the Insurer has not taken this lgroun1d–7Lblei’orethe

Tribunal and in fact, in the

Insurer has Therefore.

now it is such a ground
in this been disputed by the
learned after going through the

original–» records,” specifically, the written statement. The

aspect of the matter into

has rightly allowed the ciaim petition in

_ part”–fasterxirig the liability on the Insurer. The said

.finr:1ing recorded by the Tribunal is in accordance with

_lpip*_.Iavarrl”and therefore, interference by this Court does not

I can for.

/

7

8. So far as the quantum of compensation

awarded by the Tribunal is concerned, the Tribunal. by

assessing the income of the deceased at

month, deducting I /3*” towards his personai. It

expenses and by adopting Multipiierof

awarded a sum of ‘<".3,60,000l/':

dependency and a ?61,.(§_0{},Z§.= towards

conventional The said awarded by
the Tribunallgl and therefore, it
does orlthe Insurer has made
out :_to_:l:peohsider the reliefs sought in

this appeal. It It

or~.the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by

the=!nsture’r,Vis .{jiis’missed as devoid of merits.

Counsel for the Insurer submitted that

entire’. Compensation awarded by the Tribunal with

l.l_Aj_.a'(,Vcru’ed interests has been deposited in the Registry. In

I of the above submission, Registry is directed to

A transmit the entire amount deposited by the Insurer to

the jurisdictional Tribunal forthwith, to enable the
claimants to Withdraw the same in terms ofv’–..the

judgment and award passed by the Tribunal.

Office is directed to draw the award, * t

Image

tsn*