‘*9-3%;
Mm N(3.304i§V!3.::]’2éi}(§é3: _
IN THE HIGH COURT OF’ KARNATAKA AT;
DATED THIS THE 15TH DA?
BEF::)re_g
THE HC)N’BLE MR. _»N.Ai¥A!§.l§_A
M.F.A.NO;;..:§Q5!g c:;:*2«:>o [2§g’:~.4v)
M.F._A.NQ.3Q4_;3_ oF k2oo§_uy1\_r)
BF:'”l’WEF3N:: L
I.
‘A * » .f1fUm;1Ja angst
smys RU’rIfAiAH_» _ –
Sf0″SRI..SIU{)A”h&1%LiAIA%i
AGED A¥~’3C)U”l'”!’–S2 i’.’P?AR’.<§
PROPRIETETOR s L M ~Ro.:m LINES
§?;fA'.'i"_ HULIEMR 'ROAD
GHIKKANAVA s<*.'a.:~:,5_p;ar.r.1
* CHSiiEI€Ai'€£sYAKANAHALLI TQ
APPELLANT
{:33 RAJA, ADVOCATE)
Z Ahfi) "
SR1″ D..§;AKsHMA1AH
* = 310 LATE DODDA KARAPPA
. ‘AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
” . RfAT SRI F.’AN{}APAJA NILAYA
E JYOTHINACERA
7 SIRA TOWN
TUMKUR’ DEST
UNITED INBIA INSURANCE CO LT9
JAYAEEVA COMPLEX
FIRST FLOGR B H ROAD _. ‘ ‘A j; *’
TUNIKUR-1 REsP0Nn2:;~§*rs:g_ L-
(By Sm. M R SHASHIDI-{AR FOR R1: ” ” ” 4′
Sri.A.M.VFENKA’I’F!SH more R2) .
MFA N’0.304,fij’20€}8:
BETWEEN: #
1 SR! S PUTTAIAH .
s/0 SR1 SIIBDA MALi..’z’!§A’§% ,
AGED AROEYT 52 vramg *
momxmon s L M ROAE’L.I_Ni-13 j
R/AT HULIYAR ROAD — .. j ‘ A.
CI-HKKANAVA§{.&.NAHAf=JJ 1.
CHIKKANAYAKAEEQHALH TQ
TUMKUR V .T…APPELLAN’I’
(By Sri.
1 SMT.S.i{;’SHARAVA’fH f ~ ‘
W/0.SRI VENKATESK .
I)/0.S;R;’I-€AREH’Am_IMA¥AH
. 450523′ 23.«.BQU”1’_45 YE;A’R–S–~ *
R,’ C313′ “SF?I’;’S’. K. KRISHNAPPNS HOUSE
vAz~z:~: ESEEIEIM WORKS
‘Egan: fiA§33R»
sIi?A”I’.fi0wN,
‘1’LIm;UR Diszrggzm.
‘ .2. Lm1’I*E:i:> mam INSURANCE co LTD
~ “-._J2%.YADEVA—COMPLEX
‘ ..FiRST”PTLOOR B H ROAD
Tmmmaul RESPONEENTS
V’ my M R SHASHIDHAR FOR 12::
w ‘Sfi.A.M.VEN¥(A’¥’F3SH ma R2)
MFA8 FILED HIS 173(1) OF’ MV ACT’ AGAINST THE
.}UII>GMEN’I’ AND AWARD DA’f’ED:3G.€)9.2’0C16 PASSED IN PJEVC
NOJ053/1997 8; 1054/1997 ON THE FiLE OF CIVIL JUDGE
(SR.DN.) & ADD1″I’IONAL MAUI’, SIRA, A§v.is:é:jI:§rJc3
compswsmom 0? Rs.:._2,30,912/m 8: 12s.5o,oQo;g3.wITH–< 1'
INTEREST @ 6% rm. mom THE agfrn 0I?""Pi?.*i.'I'_I'_IOI*I 'A
PAYMENT.
These appeals, coming on °for’>.hi2az’iI’:’g_. this k~i’:§j,r, ‘~
Lhc; Cuurt, dclivcxcd (ht: foHr:wi§1g;
These: appeals of the vehicle
contending that. have been
fastened and also
comgaensatigp is on the higher
Side’ – T. . .
‘2. learned counsel
for appeilanf:i’n(i $1r*i.§£.M.Venkatsesh, learned counse!
company and Sri.M.R.Shashidhar,
iékafifigti claimant and I have been taken
V V’ .t.hm1 igh judgrnent and l”€’,t’X)7’flS.
‘A is seen fimn T’f’.’.CI)I’dS, that appeilant was the
bus (stage marriagc=:) imroived in the accident.
[ :A”f t.ht=: time of accident the bus: was over fended.
Therefnre, insurance company has taken 3 specific
-~–~~ fin-~45» T _
defence that its liabiiity is limited to 32
the policy was ismred to co’.r¢=:’ir~..théi
passengers. The insurance dimfiaifiy has-
contended that it had
passengers before the Ipkada-lauffi_:’afit1’§I$(i piirstlant
to the awanis made: has
faiied to notiqg; by insmmnce
company. of objections fiied
by ins11i$§ih’x:A:’i:otii:fii’a11ji’.$ho1:l£i”‘h¥ive framed a specific
issue liability raised by the
itismantxi: A
21-. in 2007′ Sci? 5237 (in
ij9,i*m1:1omL Imuzums company LTD.
_’ heid,
mi.’ &. (IRS. , the Supreme Ctmrt. has
” Then arises the question, how to
determine the compensation payabie arr how
to quantify the mmpensation since there was
nomeansqfascertainingwhoautofthe
overioaded ieragerzs ccnstflute the
2N . 0;/X
passengers covered by the insnmnce «T E .
aspermitted ta beaarried by e
As this court has .
Act is to bring benefit to
are either injured or
serves it sacial purpose.’
we think that the
would be to hold
in such a the
higher fa?’ ‘ will be
_v .. of catered
mg.» In the case on hand, 42
” «_ the onm who have been insured
company, 90 persons have
or got injwed 61 the accident.
have been passed for zwzeci sums.
ofthe 42 awczmls made, add them up
i and direct the insurance oornpany to deposit
thcztlumpsum. ‘I’hus,theliabzIityofthe
inswmuaecompwtywmddbetopaythe
benqfit is derived by the
the Passengers of the h.°3.d”
that the 42 awards tVc’J’«–.I_f,-e eemefied
msurcznce company
highest of the ‘ -; the
higher of the into
account Qfthase
the canmmt
e ee tribunal thereqfler
to qf the money so
«by insurance company
all the here all
leave all the clafinants to recover
._ the awner of the vehicle. bu
X it will be necessary for the
tri!Q1§t:zal,_evencdfthe1’nitia1stagq,mmake
“appropn’ate¢m:!e1s to ensure thatthe amount
be recovered from the owner by
ordering attachment or by passing other
re~.=;t1ictiyem’dersagai7Lsttheowner:s:oa.sta
$3 ‘*»Cé_ ,
ensure the satisfaction in fidl Qf the ”
thatmaybepassedult::nate’ ly.’. ‘
5. Therefore, the matter
the fribtmal. Since the
fixrther discussim”: is ;.li}(ely’v.taviV:k’;§11i’Se.tpiiejikiimvi to the
parties before the ttib1:iii1.eti§_;’ i ii
6. In the.vre$’sv1]t,
The impugned
award is remanded in the
tritmnal -:3 issue mgarding plea of
._limif§éii I;i;*–ji:iv]i1′.3r z;ai:~’=-.-edby the insurance company and
“–»dt:a<riéie ia'}§4iV§..-ii.1e.<: on merits in accordance with law.
deposited by the appeilant. with this
\~-::_p1m:'si'~1VVa_ui} be paid to claimants. If the trihamai were to
"féfiIEIi"'_«l§fl?fil§ty on the insurance company the ammmt
m claimants by this court. shall he id by the
if /'
fl\, -' , K"
insuranr:e company to appellant (owner of
and the rernairfing compensattion to c1aitx1a_r:.*.sem _: V ‘
The are dinected to 4’ H
Office is directed to V
witha copy 0}” this order.