I
IN THE I-IIOI-<1 COURT OF KARNATAKA, BAN;:3AI;OfgI$: "
DATED THIS THE 15% DAY OF FEBRIjAf{§:f,» :.»?.:.A(.):'1x(i)_ A A'
PRESENiWV A AA A A T
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE: KI 7'R:xc;fi\ \ [ ., A'
THE HONBLE MR. ,JII.§TIOE'A';.1§:'.jf~};I§:I~J.:IGOT5ALA"OOWDA
M.F.A.
M.I:A';_'Nos;I._ 73 iIO«/2-0055 :&v94V§33/2005
M.F.A. N05'. "7;3gé"-O:2;;2dI}%5: I
UNITED INDIA INs'URAN ..-COIVIPANY LTD.
POST BOX NO II, BRANCH OFFICE.
UDAYAVANI B'UILDIN.G,"NiANIPAL.
BY. ITS ASST. MANAGER.
* _ II.I§II'I?_EI) IN's'v1----£:AI\IcI:: CO LTI;).,
, 'REGIONAL OFFICE,
NO' :z_5;«..sIIANKARANARAYANA BUIDILNG.
A _I\2I-l'_O. ROAD, BANGALORE W 560 001.
' T. . APPELLANT
{BY sR,I'A.-My VENKATESH. ATNOCATE)
A C. AMBIKA.
VJ/O. LATE TN. SRIE'\27IVASA.EV£LER'I'HY.
AGE 28 YEARS
R/O. TINDUL VILLAGE.
YELAHANKA HOBL1.
BANGALORE NORTH TALUK.
4/
{J
To
NIKHIL.
S /O. LATE TN SRINIVASAMURTHY.
AGEQYEARS, " I . :
MINOR REP. BY MOTHER & NATURAI...GLIARDIAN,
R/O TINDUL VILLAGE. ' ._
YELA}{AN.KA HOBLI j; *
BANGALORE NORTH TALUKH '
3. MONISHAS, "
D/O. LATE TN. SRINIVASA
AGEGYEARS. _
MINOR REP BY NIOTIIER E; NATLJ-RAL GUARDIAN.
R/OKTINDUL VILLAGE_.a_ 2. ; *'
YELAHANKA HOBLL _ ' V
BANGALORE NO:R*TIi~ TA LUR. . _
I"\zIU_RTH"Y.,. I
4. SI{iVA--'5'RA~'5?I&D 'FF}_AKI§R, 3 V
S/Of: M. ,N;'§.RA"YAN"'7I"HAK[j-R,7.:
AGE: IvIA';1O_R _ ~
..
PARAKALA;
D.K,DISTRIG'I:' . "
_ 'I _ RESPONDENTS
(BY;jS'RI.S.S. HAVERI, ADVOCATE FOR R1)
(R2; 1%: R5 ARE SEJRVED]
E: R3 ARE MINORS REPTD. BY R1.)
IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST
'IH £*3 JLEDCEEJEENT AND AWARD DATED: 1.3.2005 PASSED IN
MVC. 546/2002 ON THE FILE OF THE IST ADDL.
"Jij.pGE 8»: MEMBER, MACT, BANGALORE. (SCCH.NO.I1),
A' =._Aw.ARDING COMPENSATION OP RS.5,82,950/W WITH
V' INTEREST AT 6% PA. FROM THE DATE OF PETTTION TILL
"HREALISATION AND DIRECTING THE APPELLANT HEREIN
TO DEPOSIT THE SAME.
y\/
M.F.A. NO. 7310 OF 2005 (MV):-
BETWEEN-
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY.LT1-- ).. I
POST BOX NO II, BRANCH OFFICE, f; ' "
UDAYAVAN1 BUILDING, MANIFAL."-. '
REP. BY ITS ASST. MANAGER,' " ._
M/S. UNITED INSURANCE CO"1;.f:'I)._ "
IEGIONAL OFFICE. * A
NO 25, sHANI<ARAI\IARAYANA----R.:IAIDILNC_ '
1VI.G. ROAD. BANGALORE' ~ 550 00.1.,
'I '- _ APPELLANT
{BY SR1 A.M. VENKATESH, .ADVOCATE)--f_* ._
I. I{AI§I"I'I=1AI\;IA,__ V _
W/ O £\I£s..GA}?§AJAP£?A,
R',/FAT.TINDUI;«VIL1.,A-OE;'--;
YELAHAN RA HOBALI.
_ BANGALORE. NO_R'r~1%I TALUK.
_ s','fO. _ MUNIBHADRANNA.
' ~ 1A{}ED"I'53*--YE3ARS.
- _ I R/§P1T_'.FINDUI, VILLAGE.
' YEIA%LA;I\IKA HOBALI.
IRANOALORE NORTH TALUK.
SEIVAFRASAO THAKUR.
V S/O. M. NARAYAN THAKUR.
AGE: IVIAJOR.
R/AT MAiN ROAD.
F'A ,
D.K. DISTRICT,
RESPONIDENTS
[R1, R2 <3: R3 ARE SERVEID)
4
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173m OF MV A§;TAGfAINsT
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:1.3.05_ PA-SEED.-v__INE_
MVC No.54?/O2 ON THE FILE OF THE 1 AI3*~DL..JLJDGE._& *
MEMBER. MACT, BANGALORE, SCCH NO--.«1.--.1 :.'*AWARD1NGg
COMPENSATION OF Rs.62,550/ -Wmi. IN"IEl_RESv'1'_ @696 RA.
1V£.F.A. N0. 9483 OF 2005 "3
BE'l'WEEN:w
I. c. AMBIKA ..
W/O. LATE TN; saRINIvAs:IAI$2I1.I_RTI TY,
AGED ABOUT28 YE!xRS.,__?* * V
R/AT TINDLU VILLAGE, v_ '
YELARAN.KA.__HOE'LI;' ' ~ '
EANGALOEE 'NORTF1 =
?\.3
Z
ZS/O."LA}1"'E TIN. SRINIVASAMURTHY.
AGED ABOIIT -
MINOR REPTD.._ mi E.Is--~MOTI«IER AND
NATURAL GUARDIAN 15"' PETR. AMBIKA,
_ W/O."'LA'I"E,f1{*..N.'=_SRI'NIvAsAMURTHY.
R/AT TINDLU VILLAGE,
Y{_EALA£LfiINKA' 'H0 BLI.
BANGALORE) NORTH TALUK.
R ' D /O'. 3;A'TE TN. SRINIVASAMURTHY,
A_GED"ABOUT 6 YEARS.
~~MI};\EOR REPTD. BY HIS MOTHER AND
NATURAL GUARDIAN 1%' PETR. AMBIKA,
A I W/O, LATE T.N. SRINIVASAMURTHY,
R/AT TINDLG VILLAGE,
YELAHANKA HOBLI,
BANGALORE NORTH TALUK.
APPEILANTS
(BY SR1 SS. I-IAVERI. ADVOCATE)
AND:--
1. MR. SHIVAPRASAD THAKUR.
S/O. M. NARAYANA THAKURJ'
AGE: MAJOR. =
R/AT MAIN ROAD.
PARAKALA.
DAKSHINA KANNADA. V
Ed
TI-II3 MANAGER. --.
UNITED INDIA INS_UI2AN.CI5:.CO«..._LT13._%_
P.B.NO.11. BRANCH"OFIé*I_CjI:, '
UDAYAVANI BUILDVI'N (}+_ V
MANIPAL --_5'76 11;»).
i 'V _ - RESPONDENTS
{BY SR1 A.M;1V\2*vs;N'I;ATI3SII.I, 'AINOCATE
OIRECTEO*I'O_;I'*AI,';I3ANGALORI<:. (SCCH NO.I 1]. PARTLY
AI.I,I;_§WINO 'I'Ha:._HCLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION
* _AN;)_ :SE_E,KiNxG ENHANCEMEN'1' OF COMPENSATION.
" Z"'ThvF§$€.'"';;pp,€8.iS Coming on for hearing this day.
J ., dCEiveI"ed the foflowing:
JUDGMENT
” A’ mother Of the decreased has flied one })€tiE’i0E’1 in
— II2I–:\I”‘.CA.N(3.547/2002 and wife and Children of the deceased
“IV*IaIJe filed Separate pet.ii.iOI1. in M.V.C.NO.546/2002 Seeking
%/
(3
e0i”npensai’.ion. Both the petitions have been clubbed.’ .tQg%€l:.:i1e<l7.'
and disposed ofby common judgment;
2. One Srinivasarnurthyi .F:ie’Ct.’ITi’Ci8.’;1 was-:.r4.idingj.£.h’e
scooter from Yelahanka teowexrdslvBangalore’.
sketch of scene of offence, the””se0ote1* was la1n’1:os’i=-oil the *
extreme left side of the road. Th.e,:’i’erry, whic’h.was,v§siati0ned
on the kacheha road oriiiatiie’.tlei§t:.si’C1éV:l the road, took a
sudden reverse di.reetion;”2=..s” alresult. QIf?a3vh.icl1 there was
collision betwejeii i.l?£§es<:4o'oi':er andhthe Eorry. The Tribunal has
held that the a(::c;Vitie§'i!_ lha_s"~ooeurred solely on the negligence
of the loriy 4i:l'riV\_Vfer._
it is "t1'heV__e_ontenii0n of t.he counsel for the insurer
'that3h..Vt};e'«Fll'{.__ it is shown that the rider of the scooter is
r'a.sh.and' n'egli'gex1t. manner hit. against the stationary lorry.
-. is the contention of the insurer in this appeal
Vlihat, there is eoni’ribut’.oi’y riegligenee of the rider of the
it . ‘ ‘secsoter to the extent, of 50%. On considering the sketch mi’
4//
soerie~ol”offer1ee at Ex.I3.4, we aire uriabie to a});p’ree.iaf..e 5il_._1_ex
argumerits of the insurer that there ‘.(‘;:{)V1}V’t’:.«’T:iV”l)L_1l.()1″y”
negligence on the part of the rider the scooter.’ tliei’
{‘,l18.I’g€”Sh€€[. ii is stated t’.hat_ tl’1e”-lorry insq-i;esVtion’:’:W’as
taking reverse direction. as a ol” tvliich with
the scooter. The FIR is. Heompliarii.
given by the Doctor of eyewwitness
to the to the FIR. The
police found that the lorry
while the scooter. in that
View ()ViV:’–. V “::’f§’l1d tha.t there appears no
c:ont’,rib_t1toi’3i/””~Voegligenee oh the part of the rider of the
s(:()-o:t€.~1′.;_Tbe._lorry.”w’hi<:'h was S13.l.iOi1€d on the left side of the
l<;;:eh'eh.:1v–..»'i'(3.el'd..V "immediateiy takes reverse direction and
collided witlfthle scooter, which was moving on the left: side.
'V_The flIi.diIi_g of the tribunal with regard to riegligence of the
f_'iorry' sound and proper and does not Call For interference,
*5. The deceased is said to be working as
l " -e–l'ecl.i*iei2ii1. His I'i'"i{)I"ll.hly income wouid be Rs.3,OOO/W }).i'{1. As
per unit system. 1. /4"' is to be defrayed towards personal
expenses. Rs.2.250/– would entire to the benefit.Vliofllthe
defendants. Hence. the total loss of dependeiieyllwon!.t:l_':
Rs.4,59.000/s[[Rs.2.250/e (income) 2: I2
[mult.iplier)}. The wife is entitled
Consortium. The petitioners together entitled –
towards loss of expectancy. — towards
funeral expenses. The 'deeea5_;edV_ hospital for 3
days. Hence, petitioners are for .Rs.;:}._(5)',0OO/s towards
n'1edi(:e1lVexpeinse%_s. petitioners are entitled for total
(:oinpenvs–ai:ioi1of with interest at 6% pet. from
the date ofVpei.itiyg';.1 t"£_lll"fhe date of payment. against
awlaidedv by the tribunal. Out. of the total
'upco:npe.nsation..__the mother of the deceased is entitled for
the remaining amount. shall be shared by
l¢_yiE'xe wire children equally. The share of the minors shall
{The Vl{e~pi: in FED. until they attain majority. The amount. in
l deposit shall be transferred to the tribunal for payment.
M.l*".A.l\§o.7309/2005 and lVl.F.A.No.73l0/2005 allowed
in part. i\/i.F.A.l'«Eo.9483/2005 is dismissed.
W
Sri A.M.Venkatesh is permitied to file va11i'a1i'a1if1'V.»if:V.. '
M'.F.A.No.9483/2005 for the i11SL1l'€I'-C()I11p:(i:11yt.,. 3 u
f §§j$«i 1%;
%j§u5§9
§.% _ fl,fiRw §§gf%
'» 3a&§@
NM"