V. Regi @1131 'Manager, ' V
.A{E$y, :Sri_.i25,3;/[4.AV'enkatesh, Advocate)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 1.4m DAY or DECEMBER, 20_;..Q'_r
:PRESENT:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUsT1c';§ 1§.K.pATIAi;j* C
THE HOIWBLE MR.JUS»TIQE 1i;'sgREMPA§a§§A_v«'
M.F.A. N0. r1i"ée>"pvo£ '2v0o 6'-<N_£TV1 ': 2
BCtWCCn: I' 'A "
The Divisional Manager, __ u
M/ s. National 1m<i1r'ance§'Co§,'
Regionai Offieef
Ramaswamy'C£rm}f)1e§<:.,n * T ' -
No.1-44, N! G Road,"
Banga1ore,X_ M V .--
Represented "by Vi'£;=._
....Appe1Iant:
1. N'}ariv--._Shef%y,
S/ Puttashetty,
A. ,Aged"57 years.
'xhiyeimma,
; W/0. Marishetty,
Aged 43 years.
to
3. Laxmi,
W/0. Late Shankara,
Aged 23 years.
4. Pavanakumar,
S/0. Late Shankara,
Aged 5 years.
5. Prajvaia,
D/0. Late Shankara,
Aged 3 years.
Respondents N0. 4 8.5 5 are
Minors, represented by
Natural Guardian m0t1:1e’r
Respondent No.3. ‘ Vi
Keragodu
Mandya Ta’iL1″k_._ ”
6. Kumaar, 1″ ,
S/0. Thirtirnall-aia~h.i —
N0. 37’/2,-2m1 i\.r:ainj’Road,”~..
10th Cross, ‘:3ovi”t?a’iya»–, _
MaVha1aksh’rni’pt1.ram[1
5 ‘ V ‘A ….Resp(mdents
._ [.E3’y.Sri. 3vs3.iAS.I:{0sVmath, Advocate for R1 to R5;
SV.’P.aju.V’/Xsscjciates, Advocates for R6)
wwsswwww
‘.u”‘Fh’is N£F;A is filed U/s. 173(1) of M.V. Act, against the
V’Judgrr1é::jt’3~and Award dated: 08/06/2006 passed in MVC No.
2 «.84/r2..OO4″‘0n the file of the Principal Civil Judge (Sr.Dr1} and
._ “and MACT, Mandya, awarding a Compensation of
_ ??%,2′;3’;00O/~ with interest at 6% pa. from the date of petition
VA tiilfi deposit. and to set aside the same.
/-*””L
‘ ,..
/ ff
‘\.J
This iVI.P’.A. coming on for Hearing this
N.K. PATIL J, deiivered the following:
:JUDGMENT.’
This appeal by the appe11a.nt–I»nsurer:i’s”a.i’isif1g ‘out__
of the impugned judgment and it
passed in MVC No. 84/2GO4.*bjr__. thedikiifieipai”t?iyii_iJtJdgei
(Sr. Dn) and CJM and Motor Tigibunai,
Mandya, {hereinafter tofasi. for
2. The Tribiinal award has
awarded a sung” ‘id..ifte’rent heads with
interest at of petition tiii the
date of of the ciaimarits for a
sum of of the death the deceased
Sri. Shankari,iii:1_V_:thVeVtoad traffic accident.
brief, of the Case are:
i of the accident and resultant
death ofvthegdeeeased Sri. Shankar are not in dispute.
‘}3’urthei*,___it is also not in dispute that, ciaimants being
pi.ithe.pjare11ts, wife and Children of the deceased have
ii fiied a claim petition before the Tribunal under section
166 of MV Act, claiming compensation against the
owner, insurer and driver of the offending vehicle. The
said ciaim petition had come up for consideration before
the Tribunal. The Tribunal in turn, after assessinghhithe
oral and documentary evidence, has allowed
petition in part and awarded a sum
under different heads with interest a:t,.i6%ii’p.a,A;
date of petition till the date-.__of deposit, fastening
liability on the Insurer. Being.i.:iaggrieiVed:iby said
judgment and awardV,”«–theAins;;.1rer._’ha’spresented this
appeal,”Heontehdirigs’that; fastening the liability on it
C8.I11’10t’ii}€ ‘sustainiejd_:’anid~.is~ liable to be set aside on the
grounds that;’ _dur.ir:gi”the”‘:pendency of this appeal, the
“~v_app1.ieati-on filed by”ti'”1’eVInsurer for production of insurance
not been produced before the Tribunal
in.adVertei§ti3I_ and due to communication gap between the
yginsurerv and the counsel who represented the Insurer, as
i,._”‘addii’ti.ona1 document has been allowed by this Court and
therefore, the matter requires reconsideration afresh.
e. We have heard the learned counsel for the insurer
and learned eounsei for claimants at considerable Ee4n.gt-h_ef
time.
5. After careful gerusat of the material av’ail–:a.b~1elbn file,__ it
including the impugned judgment .l
Tribunal, it emerges that, in’ -fact,
produced the copy of the belfere the
Tribunal. During the
application filed the of copy of
the Insurance: document has
been {nae gate dated 25.5.2010.
It is the learned counsel for the
lnsurer th’at,= the question was insured by
one Ziiauilae-alslonithe date of the accident and not
as contended by the claimants. The fact
asAlto,’wihelt’l<z.eij;.the said vehicle has been transferred to
'V the sl'ubseqiilent purchaserw cum» owner Sri. Kurnar has
lfto be decided by the Tribunal and for that, it requires
additional oral and documentary evidence and on the
6
basis of which, the Tribunal has to decide the liability.
Taking all these factors into consideration, wit1F*io’1it
going further into the merits and demerits of
and to safeguard the interest of both
would suffice for this Court
directions to the Tribunal.
6. For the foregoing by the
Ensurer is allowed. arid award
dated am June, 200?. bio Tribunal in
M.V.C.No.84 /’Q irgiiisebjg
The rriartt’e.r;§_stai1ClsV’ireiriit’t–edx§loack to the Tribunal
for recor_1s’ider’atior1A-r.’iafresh; __With a direction to pass
appropriate’yorvders iiifaccordarice with law, after
«.,affordin;§,Vircasonable.opporturiity to the Ensurer personally
counsel and to the cla.imants and dispose of
the shame, as:’j_e:§peditiously as possible, at any rate, within a
sehperiod ofiis.ixVr:’1oriths from the date of receipt of a copy of this
A ffilidgrrgerit and award.
i HOffice is directed to forward the lVlisc.Cvl.2049l/2OO9
” the Tribunal, immediately.
{S11
Further, liberty has been reserved. to the counsel for
the Insurer to file one more app1iCE3.{.i()F1 before the Triburgal
for prociuctioh Of additional ciocumerits. if su<:h'"*–an
application is filed by the insurer, the Tribunal. is V
receive {be same and proceed further in accord.a5m1je»..vi%ith
the above directions issued by thié v i
All other grounds urged byi4't.he-._E.nsuif€ri:'an'di
claimants are left open.
The amount dep:i)Si_t€d_’Vii.ii>dyT “kfisurerii éhail be
refunded to the Insurer i
Office to :'<':1:~i.«;,»;j:;;az1i the:-.aw'a'r"d éeeerdinglyr.
Sd/~
JUDGE
gdigg
PIJDGFZ