The General Manager vs Ashok on 21 October, 2013

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                       DHARWAD BENCH

           DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2013

                              BEFORE

          THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. NARAYANA SWAMY

   MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.3576 OF 2008 (MV)

Between

1. The General Manager
   KSRTC,
   K.H. Double Road, Shantinagar
   Central Law Office
   Bangalore

2. The Deputy General Manager
   Internal Insurance Fund KSRTC
   K.H. Double Road, Shantinagar
   Central Law Office
   Bangalore
   after bifurcation of the Corporation
   the appellant is called as
   The Managing Director, NWKRTC
   Central Office, Gokul Road, Hubli
   District: Dharwad
   Represented by is Chief Law Officer
   Central Office, Hubli
                                                 ...Appellants
(by Shri Shivakumar S. Badavadagi, Advocate)

And:

Ashok
R/o Parappa Halabhavi
Aged about 34 years
Occ: Painter, R/o Lolasar,
Taluk: Gokak
                                 2




District: Belgaum
                                                      ...Respondent

      This MFA is filed under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles
Act against the judgment and award dated 16.11.2006 passed in
MVC No.910 of 2001 on the file of the Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) and
Additional MACT, Gokak.

       This appeal coming on for orders, this day, the Court made
the following:

                        JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the Corporation against the

Judgment and award dated 16th November 2006 passed in MVC

No.910 of 2001. The respondent, who is the claimant, filed

claim petition for the injuries sustained in the accident on 5th

July 2000. Originally, this appeal was filed before the Principal

Bench at Bangalore and after constitution of Circuit Bench, this

appeal was transmitted from Bangalore Bench to this Bench.

The learned counsel for the appellant submits that in this appeal

notice was ordered on 22nd August 2013 when the appeal came

up before this Court for taking steps for service of notice. He

further submits that he has paid the process today.

2. The judgment and award impugned in this appeal has

been examined in the light of the reasons assigned by the
3

Tribunal. The Tribunal has awarded the compensation of

Rs.1,04,800/-. The claimant has proved the accident and the

nature of injury by examining PW.2 Doctor and has marked

documents as per Exhibits P1 to P25. On behalf of the

respondent-appellant herein, none has been examined and no

document has been marked.

3. I have also gone through the discussion made by the

Tribunal in awarding the said compensation. I find that the

Tribunal is justified in awarding compensation. Hence, I am not

inclined to interfere in the matter.

4. The most heart-burning thing to be noticed in this case

is that till today i.e. even after the lapse of thirteen years, the

claimant has failed to get the compensation. The object of the

Motor Accidents Compensation Act, 1999 is to extend relief

within the earliest possible time. By invoking one or the other

reason, this appeal is being dodged, for which, including the

learned counsel, to some extent the management of the

appellant is also responsible. Under the circumstance, I dispose

of this matter directing the appellant Corporation to deposit the
4

entire amount, including the amount in deposit before this Court,

within a period of six weeks from today. Amount in deposit be

transmitted to the Tribunal. In terms of the above, the appeal

stands disposed of.

SD/-

JUDGE

lnn