rm THE HIGH Comm' 0:: KARNATAKA AT BANeAmf?§E:y_
DATED THIS we 16TH DAY 03': JUNE, 20.(§§' % ;;M_T if
BEFORE
ms HOWBLE MR. zusrzcs AN.V=§NL5-Q£:§'P23.'L;5.'-GG$fi1'f§;§__A
Misceilaneous First Apaeaifig. 393 _d§=
BETWEEN:
United India Ensurance {§9."jf.td;_, V. " '
Branch Offica, Chik$<amaga!2__.{r. "
By Regional Manager, _ .
United India Ins.u.r'?a"ra<;_e Ltgia,
Shankamarayarja E}iTu':!_;ii;:gA, V
M.G.Read, Ban'g%:«!.cra»I§6G-.jCQVI;_ _ '
By its Manager; ;j_
.J3\PPE§.i,ANT
{Ey Sajf. <;:«._ Ma;2ie§¢§1'A.'dv..;') J
em. pawatrm;
'Ageci 42 .y§aa§ts,
W32. Lazavfiamagiri Naik,
Eshsxfaré fxiaika
., 'Aged 28 years,
" f£{o__£_ate Ramagiri Naik.
. __§.a%<shrr:ana Naika
' Aged 24 years,
S/st,
Kadur Taluk, ChEkkamagaiur--£}ist.
5. Lakkegowda, Ma}'or,
S/o Bukkagowda,
R/0 Bevarahatii, V .
Lakya Hobii, " ,V
ChEk§ENTS
(By SrI.V:g5fi'és;.hvgéVf:$3..$'i'§'érV~:§§;*3v.':§ofa1 to R5 and Sri.
Basavarajv Ka;fécfe'£s;__for.,_§z5__) '
'rHzsVMi=;A is .E2L.jE:i?'c;:$3'B«&R secrxcm 273(2) OF W
ACT AGAINST "THE _3UD"GM'ENT AND AWARD DATED:
24.9.20{).7_ PASSED IN7'MV{." N0. 460/2305 ON THE FILE OF
"THE PRfESi§}ING 0F?I_(;ER, FAST TRACK CC}URT-II AND
;_v"'?9iACT~£V ; QHIKMAGALSR, AWARDENG A COMPENSATIOF4
"OFRi'3,3,.13,0.GQ/=*--.WiTH INTEREST @ 6% PA. FROM THE
D;i*§'E' _G_F' P§T1uT*£G~!x_i T§LL 33590527.
"'.'.¥_'_1"i s vagipézail having been reserved, the Ceurt
Vasaiivered the; foflowfng:
Ligii
_,V_..5§2s.=.sg::or:der:i:s 1 ta 5 had flied MVC 469/2905 against
apgeiiant/6"' respondent and me J.K..Ramegowda
V under Secticn 166 of the Indian Motor Vehicies Act, 1988.
he said petition was aitewed by the learned £’«*§ee1_};b”e::5..’g;:”*.’..j:t¥*%¢-:._i: _
Meter Accieent Ciaims Tribunaf-IV at
awarding compensation of Rs.3,13;,’0O{iZ¥Aj;vs%§1:b’:’.i.n’teresteA_’_:fit
5% p.a. and directing the ap;:’ei<_Eantitsviisatisfy,..2§ige.':4e'wei'rd'..Vt
Feeiing aggrieved, this appeai hiéétefieen prefeffrevd.
2. One RamagérivA:’.AV:i§£a.rayana Naik,
resident of T.B.4i§at§t, taluk in
Chikmagaiufi ” and Shandy
busir3essr;r}a;_rv2,A””2.€r:t1’iie::;;::’tre’£eii.¥:ri§’ goods van bearing
ReQiStT3fi9¥i’« with his goods, met
with a fatai””;a4_§:c:ie;ie%it_ érfci’ .§§gr~:eumbed to the injuries, The
ls: re$gije’hd.ent ié’ h§e wif:e and respondents 2 to 5 are his
Zli’-.§:i’i’AiE}cir,Vei:s3\ ‘:fhejr~.fi__ied ciaim petition tinder sectien 166 at’
Ir{d.i_a’§é..Vi?§dterv_viXléiiiieies Act, contending that, the death of
V it the saiiie’ aa;{nag’:r: isiaik was due ta actienabie negligence cf
dtr§_ver” ef the said vehicie wha was impfeadeé as
‘.’_reS’;7endent ¥s£ot3 in the ciaim petition. The claim petiticn
it :j’.4§%1as’icontested by the respondents therein. The appeiiant:-
“insurer ccntended that the vehicle being a gases vehécie
k
/1
and the decaased being a gratuitous gaassaagerflt’hgawsi _
iegai iiabifity ta satisfy the award, if any, u ‘v
on the pleadings of the parties, iss§:es:.§vfaré’~faé.s’éa”b§{‘-sstwfia_s
Tribunai. First claimant depossqas
was examined to establish ac’tui'”s’a.:Vabl_a nVa§–:?§jaf¥ca:’fgon the
part :23’ the driver of thasaid.’_7aafiAi¢§:aV_._’».: E><:¥=*1 £38 were
marked in their exgidenca, 'béh?va*V"respondests,
an authorized fafifaser*;§§ati'€g_e: :of:_"Effsf"inswaranca Campany
5990593 35 said vehicle deposed
as their evidence. After
ccmsiderirégthe o'ra¥"a;r;d"d.§§€umantary evidence on record
with rafevranca"t,c: {ha riiraf sontentions of the parties, the
has h"=a¥'d tP§VajtVfi:'?§a drivsr having driven the vehécia
E'n___r'as h'sa§'d.Lnag£i§:isnt manner, Ramagiri Nayak sustained
fatai'a£§c§danf'a«réa diad later. It has further heid that, the
–.%.T,”_j’;.-»_s%a§mant”bsa§*ag the wife and chiiarsn of the deceased. have
the loss,
/;.
3. I have heard Sri.O.fv3ahesh, £earned
the apeeilant and Sri. Vigneshwar S.Sh§a~etr§;;~..:Eeernec£_:”
courssei for the respondents 1 to 5.
4. Sr£.O.Mahesh, c::2:1teir>:::l::e’:Ci~..>t?1aA€”, Eas
grossiy erred in fva.e§en§n’g;e-****Vefie'””-»e_E§’ab§!ity’*~A the
appeiiant/insurer in respetf__of”‘t.heV:ec§§~§_,aAfit garréed in the
insured geoes v.Ve4bj£f:£e “Enact covered as
per leeewed counsei, the
judgment..e.nd”A”ewa%§}’a}5§:.:Elf centrery ice iaw and
materia¥:V’e’n festenéng of the fiabifity
insofar as tVf:e.”apeei.Eer:t”ie;..’e’cencerned is iieb¥e to be set
4_..V.eside..«.§§..ee~reed ¢€>Va:€3$__eH? pieced reliance en the decision of
“‘Vtuh»§s;V”€f_eurHtV’«.ir’:«., t’he case of umrree mom INSURANCE
ce:*4§A.r<:a*% 7:;::v::_"é'e'fe vs. KRISHNAPPA AND ANOTHER
–reportéd%#:r:e§2eé7 (4) KCCR 2313.
Per’ contra, Sri Vigneshwer S.Shastry, by iakéeg
. ‘*—-“§e_e§_€hreugh the evieence of PWJ, RWs..1 and 2 centendeé
fihat, the tribunai has not cemmitted any errer er Eitegaéity
in fastening the ¥iabi§ity en the aepeiiant, which had
\,
/S
deceesee has traveiied in the vehicle as a__;§?ati:it.e_tie___”‘_
passenger, the appeiiant cannot be heid iietiiejfjteié “=
the award. On the other hand;:,__ if:.thé.« uiziehizieesetif-ih_ee.;Vii
travelied in the vehicle at the*ti_h1e «d’f__ttie ac.ci”t1eetV_V.VaioEn§h
with his geeds by hiring the V’Vé§i§_V(%t€_uf0f””§l’3i_i5$§OT£§§fl§ the
geocis, ie., as a cwner eif’t%he »;jVoq.t§é,:<.ti1e"atward passed by
the tribunal against the ap_;:;eiiVerét__Vt:éiu¥ij~~.;§eV'§t;–etified.
9. PW-glisi?{ife:.pf_;t’he ‘t'”i_e:éeaV,*,=eci. She has stated
that, en ~..hu’sben.d”§ Ramagiri Naik whiie
returningfrcm s’h’eh:é’y_.’with the unsoid vegetabies
in goods veh._i§cie.v met with the accident
__;which,. ‘1%:I’a’V$’AC3F3 actoeht___qf.the rash and negiigent driving of
«.__{pe53:§.’V’3 3téhieie’~~.i2_y its driver, received fatai injuries and
sL{c;c;j’i%;bé§;°’_~’.,;nithe cross-examination, can behaif of the
Viesurefice”*~v:eeih;3eny, she has edmitteci as true the
“3’~e:iggeet.ieh”‘macie to her, that her husbanci was tratzeilieg; in
‘.’_t«he’Vie’rr’% aioeg with the vegetables by paying the charges.
i teidthiieg eise has been eiiciteezi frem WI-1 he come to the
is
fi.
ccnciusien that deceased Ramagiri Naik éid mt
the goods.
3.0. RW-2, the driver of the v;ehic’E_ e,A~”has~.svta.i’e<{
on 95.05.2905 Ramagiri Naikf-1.9adés i_§r;i:QV"..§€is:..;'vVe.héfi¥e
vegetabies and greens _by paf;{i_EtVVfg.»v..i:?';'asVjAhiséfitsarfgfés, for
transporting them ts and that ha
traveiled in the veffisie as; According
to RW-2, he_ the traffic
ruies. fiiiéfi:~~.hi':'5f"\:.v'£hAé'"*:.?»az;'sase<:i had consumed
Eiquor afia fs¥E vahécie. In the cross-
examinat£ofiV”s«.by.th’e ii€a’rn.;;:4§d cczunset fer the insurance
4..v..c;ompv_a§iy.: has sdnzséttegd that he drove the gsods vehicie
‘:r;n itfhe,sai:Ve’.sf..Vék:££dsst. He has further admitted that, on
thsaiz Naik paié the hire charges ans ioaded
his g§§%::<;is"V..:~ §*sgetabies and travetled with the gseds.
_"2fh.uAs.js%t_bs§:on'3es ciear that, the deceases hired the vehicie
purpose sf transpsrting his goods, nameiy,
"*«.§V§é"g"etab3es and greens. After loadisag them, had traveiieé
K
//U.
with his geods and has met with the fate!
tater succumbed.
11. RW-1, an administrative:’offi§’er..bfAthe-tif&’s£1§’e’ts*2.cei1.t_i
company, has admitted that tti_e«..\_gehieie ha;§ i3’ee:’i.’vvE.n.sVur?edv
for the period from os.%o5.2oe§fta% eL;?.oté;*g’ga§§ gm the
poéicy is at Ex.R-1, whie1~@r”‘as;tefiV–.i;ta.e’d»a£e of accident
i.e., 05.06.2065. …Accofriin{tj. does not
cover the Ramagiri Naik
had paid the-w..fe:’re:’}_:en’t! the vehicfle. In the
cross-exv’a.mi’natien;the’ti2.e’S=.etEryiittec§ that, he is not aware
whether Ré’t?1§ gE.riVVV’wtifevelied with his geods from
..v..3evag’a§¥_uehasjdyxt’t*e«-._Ba.¥iawera shandy on the date of
“_ecc;ijcie_nt…:_Rwélivhad no knowledge of hiring ef the xiehicie
carrying the genes and the deceesee
‘having ?..ra”‘$;Ve!}exd with the goods. The best evidence ceuée
met’ evfwizhe driver, who had eoiiected the hire charges,
~«.t;weAfr}°§»i’tteé the wading of vegetabie genus and carried tee
“–«:e%}§fier ef the geods in the vehicle towards Banawara.
u ‘While they were eroceedirzg with the goods in the vehicie,
1%
unfortunateiy, the accicierit has taken
deceased having sustained fatai injuries,fitiavsfiaterV'”
succumbed. The vehicie having bi?;en>ri3’ejarii; f{ir’~.ca–:=:yLiii§,ii .’
the goods and the deceased hVazr_i”ng tfayéiied
along with the Q6063 by paying ‘i§i’i»zi:e;7i’chargVés, ifisiurance
company has been righ’i;iy._ the iiaisility to
satisfy the award.
12. Ipi. i*C’r:;é:;iirz;*;’piia (supra), the
dac:eased___ §[3′[§€_3r?*S;:’1.:::’;Q’ “t:t.{§:ge!vi’ad as a gratuitous
passengésr anti Vridt’fi.r3_ ‘th’éV._§a*pacity of owner carrying the
goods in igQe’tis.””si’;ehi:§’iie’ and hence this court has:
_vVai!owee§’ti1e.appéaiiiin tiie iristant case, Ramagiri Naik was
:’*~.i1i:§i:’a had traveiied with his geeds, which is
cléa_r”‘ii:joir”:”fhvg%__é;;’i’t§ence sf both PW»: and RW~2. iii the
i3irCEii°i’iSt8E’iV¢é$’,”.:ti’i$ tribunai is justified in heiding that the
w””‘.v.44’eii:i<ie.:'=_;;e 6:: record disciosa that the deceaseé was
4'_'_'i,';'i_?ia'¥;~*.i8i§"?'ii'i:§ in the veihicie aisng with his goods at the time 9%'
Vi ::'..$'<:i;;i'ées'it and iierice the insurance ccmpariy is iiable ta pay
3 "éiie cempansatian. /,
11
13. The tribunal is justified in treaténg the
of the deceased at Rs.3000/- per month keeping”:’téVV’_’§>*~§J§}s:-.____”.
the fact that, he was an agricuétarist and ems»..4éj:~?s:a’§é§:ne§$u v
man, doing buséness in the shandys. £§ff:j:;*:§%}”g’*-.ééézé-agez,T
at 45, the apprdprfate s*r*:e.:EtE;3§V§eaj_caf “”i3;.?..’._”‘V§2as %3ei’*aAfsRaj.pp§’_§’;e=dV’ .
and the 1059 Of depandency §id’a.:$:*b1eenV”‘ z3s’;s’eS1se.é:? Afier
deducting 1/3″‘ towa.;’ds..é_ pé%§c:r’:§é3._ Ebfiperaséé do? ‘me
deceased, the contributieriw éd t?;’e:’been rightiy
taken at Rs.20€3t3j;,,:,fiar Vef dependency
has been ccérrectijr’VT.ja~,.sse§$ec§.;”a;9f;_d _a_ward=ed. The ameami
awarded andelsfthe {:a{$v’§§¥”:t5¢’n_éé’.é3eads is net exaessiare.
The award passeda”b3{:’th&2′.’triA§.ufiéi is jast.
“‘FdrjV’f’¥’::e ?§;”a gJ3E._ng d§$duss%cns, the appeai is davaéd df
merif *a:iVd.d-h;e:’::%§e.ivis¥ fiaféby désmésssed. No C6325;
_ T%:e””‘am<:§.:5n'E:':""Er; degdséi made fig; me aggeiiaszi is
..€3r_der7e£¥s is be tyansfaryeé Emmedéaiaégz id {ha
«.Vfri5:m'aA3V_Vfr;v:"–Aé2ecessa ry actien.
kisj/»
Sc!/-
Iudqe