{"id":161357,"date":"2009-04-01T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-03-31T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shivarama-parameshwara-hegde-vs-subray-honnappa-naik-on-1-april-2009"},"modified":"2016-11-11T16:58:34","modified_gmt":"2016-11-11T11:28:34","slug":"shivarama-parameshwara-hegde-vs-subray-honnappa-naik-on-1-april-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shivarama-parameshwara-hegde-vs-subray-honnappa-naik-on-1-april-2009","title":{"rendered":"Shivarama Parameshwara Hegde vs Subray Honnappa Naik on 1 April, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Shivarama Parameshwara Hegde vs Subray Honnappa Naik on 1 April, 2009<\/div>\n
Author: K.L.Manjunath And Rahim<\/div>\n
_;-\nIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA\n\nCIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD\n\n \n\nDATED THES THE  DAY OF APRIL;2~@\u00a7}~\u00a72 __'_ .:'  \n\nPRESENT\n\nTHE HONBLE \u00a5V1R.JUST';j CE \n\n AND '\nTHE HONBLE MR.j\"t3\u00a7T\"\u00bb:CE 3A'wA\"L3\u00abVRA\"H\u00a71M\nMESCELLANEOUQ ':21RS7'i'}5\u00a7;:%'r>\u00a7g;J,;\"'F':=eQ.262'3A\/\u00e90o\u00ab:;{M\\;3\n\n@ \nsHivARAMA\u00a7.vPngg:.1ME\u00a73H\\\u00a7\\m}~i2A'\u00ab%{'Et;aE_. 5A\nA6355   _   \nOCC:AGR5?.CU_:LT_\u00a7}RE;---- ,t\\N't:\u00a7;\u00a7 ' . V-\n\nCOOK Hay rw:2,0{~r:i.s__s1c,>,N' ._ \" \"\n\nW0 5\": ANofj.r.>Qs?\u00a7;;';<A*rc;_A:, \n'{Q:KUi\\1T_A V L  \n[1)ISTRICIT'\u00ab:.KAR\\fJAR._  \n\n...APPELLANT\n\n.{5\ufb01r_{ SR1. SIDDAPVVPA S SAJJAN FOR\n\n  SR1" R_Av1~.%.(;.sAB'H'*AH:T, AD\\\/S.,)\n\n e; su3'r\u20acA.\\=T::HoNNAppA NAEK\n\n MAJOR, OWNER OF GOODS\n'RICKSHAW Nm<A-3o\/4442\nAT AND POE3T:URKERI\n\nVTQ; KUMTA\n\n  DISTRICT:KARWAR\n\n\ufb01c\ufb02v\n\n\n\n-3,\n\n". THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER\n\nUNITED INQIA INSURANCE CO.L"?D,,\n\nDIVISIONAL OFFICE, KARWAR\n RESPONDENTS<\/pre>\n
(BY SR1 J.S.SHETTY, AD\\\/., FOR Rwl;\n<\/p>\n
SRI RAVINOPA R EVEANE & SR1 M ARLJN PONr\\IAPP_A,,_f\u00ab\u00ab.._’—_
\nAOvS., FOR R42)  \u00ab ~ ‘<\/p>\n
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION’CA.j:I~:I”3{i)5_TOP__
\niVI.\\\/.ACT AGAINST THE }UDC5MENT_Ai\u00a7|Dv’AWAR{)_’:’A.DATED
\n9.1.2004 PASSED IN MVC NO.1%\u00a71\/2.001; CQKD’NC};2.7:4;4.2I’}O1)’~-._ j<\/p>\n
ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL MA,_CT_ \u00ab.A’fJ;D..VC1.VIL
\nJUDGE {SR.DI\\J), CIM, O,K\u00bb:,-._I<Aev\\.:.AR, P;A'IIIf4L\\(v_AI;.Ov\u00bb'IAIIG
\nTHE CLAIM PETITION FOP'–r;O.MPENS1AT'IO2j\\I ANO"'SEEKING
\nENHANCEMENT OP I:OMPI~:AISA"TI,OI\\IV,_ "  3<\/p>\n
THIS APPEAL I:.rjjm_II\\!.:3 ;QA}"..g\u00a9\u00e9'.rP\u00a7EARING THIS DAY,
\nJAWAO RAHIM J., IIZIELWEREDTHE__.E{3l;'E;.O\\I;\/ING:W<\/p>\n
:"TlTe"  'riS4V_VV'iPn:""a__T3;:5eal against the gu\u00e9gment and
\naward A:o';.I%I'1I.:}f2OO1 On the file of the MACT at<\/p>\n
%<V_a'F.wa_r,' being""diSS_a.t%sfied with the grant of <:Om;3ensatiOn as<\/p>\n
' ;,Va'i'-SOTI:h_e~OI=deI<._abSOlving insurer of its Hability.<\/p>\n
 We have heard the learned counsel On both<\/p>\n
sid"eS.""  A<\/p>\n
\ufb01g?\u00bb<\/p>\n
.3.\n<\/p>\n
E3. The appellant filed a claim seeking compensation
\non material proposition that on 31.12.2008 at 14f\u00a530u.hours,<\/p>\n
he was travelling in autorici<shaw goods v~e-\u00a7n.icl.e'_'bearing<\/p>\n
registration No.i<penditure is substantiated through the<\/p>\n
 vnfietlical records of the hospital.\n<\/p>\n
,4-\n<\/p>\n
4. Appellant contended that due to physical
\ndisability which has visited him as a consequence of the
\naccident, he lost income. He was an agriculturist and aiso a<\/p>\n
orofessioiwai cook. from both the soiirces, he .hai”ri9V”e:\u00a5ir<n'i'ng of<\/p>\n
Rs.8,S{}0\/– per month. The work is now inii.\u00a7'qjos,siio:lVe" <\/p>\n
has lost the income.\n<\/p>\n
5. His claim was V
\ncontending that the accident\u00ab.:_has\u00bb not o_cc’urre_dV”i~–nith’e”:manner
\nstated bY.l”.h\u20ac? DetitiQra5..? an\u20acjl”‘sri\u00a7K>nV'{i-!>.\/._’ elven-if~i’t\u00a7 were to be
\npresumed that  not due to the<\/p>\n
negiigence of  contended that the<\/p>\n
driver dio”no’t””h’a-viei or”ii;iio’s.sess effective driving iicence as on
\nthe date”o_fiaccident.. = fl”-ihe insurer also questioned the claim<\/p>\n
‘petitio’rie.rvwith regard to his loss of earning and the<\/p>\n
.A johgysicalldisability that he suffered.<\/p>\n
  ownei of the vehicle had also resisted the<\/p>\n
<:l'a'im"'ivisn"v'vhich, defence is denial siiholicitoz' without any<\/p>\n
 "s*oecific plea. However, the insured has elaoorateiy averred<\/p>\n
ii i<\/p>\n
F
\nU:\n<\/p>\n
O<\/p>\n
that the vehicle was insured validly and liability if any is on<\/p>\n
the insurer to discharge the award.\n<\/p>\n
7′ Based on material proposition in _’r;h”e of<\/p>\n
the parties, the Tribunal raised rel.e\\.\/,.a”;~2.r’*–.i:ssues”for-.._<\/p>\n
consideration and applying the E3\\\/:i,C’lerj.1C\u20ac.ug ‘te’ri-de’i<evvd_.'Vby :'the"—_i[<\/p>\n
petitioner as P.W.1 and_doCa:i"ne'ntai'y1.~"\u00e9t,<i.t\u00a3<e.iiCe '.Vv=\u00a2i'i'i"c,h<\/p>\n
comprised the copy of FIR, Metor_'Jeh'\u00a7cl–e_Rlrijspegttor's Report<\/p>\n
and other ii1VE3Stig'a;..t_.i?"i.<3  the claimant had
\nsubstantiated the aCciVd_e'i"it_  negligent driving
\nby the drivero\ufb02tiweiofferidinlg who was respondent
\nNo.1 in ithge-:\ufb01_p3arti,.\/' "'*%*rheV"'gVsaic\u00a3 finding has not been
\nC;Liie3sV"i.iAoi'i-.et\u00a7  or the insurer. Tlierefore, it has<\/p>\n
reaChed'"*fi\u00a2_nalvivtg?'.' _ A'<\/p>\n
 it Inna-..th_is 'appeal, the claimant has sought for<\/p>\n
\u00bb ige-n_V%3ancen74er*it__of compensation on the basis that there is no<\/p>\n
' 2reai\u00a7'ist'i<:u.C\u00a7et'e;i*i4nination of the cornpensation. The tribunal has<\/p>\n
 haxsimproper approach to grant comeensation under<\/p>\n
2 " various heads notiona\u00a3ly_<\/p>\n
 132\/<\/p>\n
-5-<\/span>\n<\/p>\n
9. In supoort of the aopeal, the learned counsel for<\/p>\n
the apoellant would contend the following:<\/p>\n
The claimant was travelling in ‘[Il’l’E?.:’.”\u00ab.”V\\’;’-E3\u00a7’2lCl\u20ac<\/p>\n
accomoanying the goods and therefore,<\/p>\n
covered. The compensation wa_s….Iia_ble_-to”be.oa~id’_\u00a5.Vby_the<\/p>\n
insured and the insurer together’-:dand”in” vi’e.w”~o_F thvecistillririency  ‘A<\/p>\n
of the policy, the insurer  dis’c\u00bbhai’ge  is
\nurged due to amoutation  -the  physically
\ninvalid and incapabletot”n_ot’–V_or’a:_iyil’ivi’iVig:”a.g\u00bbnormal life, out also
\nhas suffered total logs. Thirdly, he had
\nincurred  medical treatment,
\nctonveyaiiice1.vvlldie’t.:::ai”id4″iin:<:'i-dentaI which, the triomial has not
\ngranted,'g_'_4Lavstlhgll\u00e9wiltg that despite the claimant<\/p>\n
having=establis\u00bb–hed that insurance policy was valid as on the<\/p>\n
.A   the tribunal unjustl\ufb01ably absolved the<\/p>\n
H ~.ins_ura'nce~–_co;npany on the ground that cow and calf carried<\/p>\n
iiiutlie"—\u00a7QAe|\ufb01i"cle do not come within the definition of goods and<\/p>\n
 'h=e..nceVv,"'he cannot be said to have accompanying the goods.<\/p>\n
10. Per Contra, learned counsel for the insurer wotsld
\ncontend that the Tribuna! has justifiably abso__lver:i the<\/p>\n
insurance company 0;’ its liability noticing that .ti2e:'”c_la–i,Vmant<\/p>\n
was not one of the gaerson covered U\ufb02CfE’.’i;:*-th\u00e9V*th3l,l.i*ah”Qe<\/p>\n
policy. Learned counsel further_Co.n.tend_s”tha’t.ji3a’seti=Vonthe <\/p>\n
material evidence and record, it’:.’isi,’_niotViced. that greispoiriident  ”<\/p>\n
No.1 did not have effect’iive””~..valid”5i\/:\u00a7e.\ufb02_\u00a7\u00e9v:,’_’AtAo._;”d~r.i.v’e goods
\nvehicle as on the date  thelcilgaigivfnant, on his
\nvolition, has stated  poiice that he was
\nSitting with thgrrlvrivet.*i’n”t.he ‘C”a.b.f,;_r_,1v.g5a.::’f\ufb01’\u00a2’}e:oie, mere was a<\/p>\n
clear vioiatior) ,.teriI?T}S anflltonditions of the insurance<\/p>\n
gyolicyv asV,”ohfl.y oii*!fe’p_e’\u00e9s,or1 waswpermitted to be seated in the<\/p>\n
vehicle i.e-., the  <\/p>\n
 u;’t~i\u00a5,. l*nl’eV…i\/vvoui_rJ ftstthet contend that the insurance<\/p>\n
.A 1policyiis.pel4Vls~\u00ab.out that the EMT endorsements 13 and 14 have<\/p>\n
H anot:bvveein-i__nv,oked by the parties Concerned and no premium<\/p>\n
has b–eenfcoliected to cover the ris\u00a7< of non~fare paying<\/p>\n
V " passengers like the ciaimant in this case. Lastly, he wouid<\/p>\n
27-Vcontend that viewed from any angle, violation of terms and<\/p>\n
&Q2,<\/p>\n
3;-\n<\/p>\n
conditions of the insurance policy are apparent and therefore,
\neven if there be validity of the isolicy, it is vitiateci by
\nviolation and breach of covenants. Supporting the _i.._n_npugned
\ngudgment absolving the insurance company-;._”*-.hfe’_V:”*s4eel<s<\/p>\n
dismissal of the appeal.\n<\/p>\n
12. Keeping in mind what’i’s\u00bbu.rge-d b.’oth.x’svi4ijes’;itsis <\/p>\n
necessary to first deai with the1″c:ue..stion  ~.iii!1″-a’:tne?’–:the
\ntrieunal is justified in abso|vi.ng~.t_the i”r’.sur’ance “c..oi*r”ipa’ny ofits<\/p>\n
liability.\n<\/p>\n
13. The arguifnegats  :the”~.Vl.ea..rjVned counsel for the<\/p>\n
insurer oncrthe as’pec_ts\u00bb..referred” to above are seemingly very
\nimpressing, b*L:Vt”oAfi’._c|’oser.examination, the gtounds are only
\nwortlj: reje’ctiVon~for t\u00e9iesfollowing reasons:-<\/p>\n
 i.,T:he’*driving”‘l’icence issued to respondent No.1 has been<\/p>\n
 “sje’r’iou’s\u00bb.!.py”5it;.es.tiooeo. We have examined the copy of the<\/p>\n
Eic4ei1Ce~~i\/Vihi’ci’2 is at E><.R.3. its perusal reveals that<\/p>\n
 respsonsdent No.1 has been issued with a permanent driving<\/p>\n
..,,4'_"'V!l,ce'.a'ice valid from 28.1.2000 to 27.1.2020 with further<\/p>\n
-9-<\/span>
\nendorsement that it permits him to drive transport vehicle for
\nthe period up to 5.1.2004. Learned counsel for thle”‘\u00bbi.nstirer,<\/p>\n
referring to the other entries in Ex.R.2, conte~nd’ed__’__’thatuthe<\/p>\n
autoricl<shaw in Question was a transportiv-ehi:c.l'e,' \u00a7'3t.lt" theg_<\/p>\n
licence granted to respondent;No.1"'wa\u00abs 'toV._:cJ'r.ivve'"a__hon\u00e9, <\/p>\n
transport vehicle. He has been perrhitted .clr'iv"e t'ra"risoe.rt
\nvehicle only from 6.1.2001. "Tshy:e"i\u00bb'efore.' it h'as-I  construed
\nthat he had no valid ':q.\u00a2i_vinji.'l'iV\u00a2\u00a7s.{i.ceV'.vt"o..driveuiaHdoods vehicle<\/p>\n
like the one in Ciuestio\ufb01;\n<\/p>\n
14.5 referred above spells
\nout  issued has valid from
\n28.1.2000  and it is undoubtedly issued to
\nthe claiihaynt the occurrence of the accident in<\/p>\n
 ThnisV–d:ocun1ent also substantiates undoubtedly that<\/p>\n
, :i=espoVhdent”‘i\\lo.1 is authorized to drive transport vehicle up to<\/p>\n
   is only a condition on which licence with a<\/p>\n
va4l’iditydfrdm 28.1.2000 up to 27.1.2020 is issued, which<\/p>\n
 ‘*m.e1ariVs” that respohtleht No.1 was duly authorized to drive a<\/p>\n
‘”gt’ra’ns;>ort vehicle for the period indicated above. The<\/p>\n
ate<\/p>\n
~20-\n<\/p>\n
accident in this case has occurred on 31.12.2000 which is
\ncertainly after the issuance of the driving lic’e\u00bbnce to<\/p>\n
respondent No.2. Theeefore, the contention..~\u00abo\u00abf.’ut~h._e”‘msuyrer<\/p>\n
that 6.1.2001 should be taken as the’date-..tVo:.A_l.r’ec_ko0n”ilthl\u00e9dn<\/p>\n
validity of licence is untenable and\n<\/p>\n
15. We also l’e]’eC*\u20acfl’..E3u conltention
\nas per the Regulations of vreh’i~cies’ ‘:Aci::’,f\u00a7 licences are
\nissued initiaily for a’  aiftler which, the
\nlicense e><pires.' ihis'AiVsy_Vljesca~\u00a5..iVse thei'AriVsjt.1rV'ance company has
\non its own%_"   iiiri-K'"ivtsigevidence for alacing<\/p>\n
reliance  i:tp;_ ;[t'V"lSil\ufb01ig-r\u00e9f'Q–i;\u20ac V"i;3o'i.ind by the dOC%.%l"i'1E'\ufb02tai'y<\/p>\n
evidence. 'whvivchf-.it4'iha's._0;;ro'd;iced. Since the same is not,<\/p>\n
bi'ought'i4_nto_  as no official from the Motor<\/p>\n
Vehicles Deoaiitnient has been E*_'XE}i'TT\u00a7i3EEd by the insurance<\/p>\n
.0 :comp.aid..y–.i;Ao"~-.e_licEt as to whether such an issuance is iegaliy<\/p>\n
 ~.o'e.r.ii1ivss\u00abVi"b\u00bbFe'*ors.not, we reject the arguments to the contrary<\/p>\n
ad4'van"cAed"in this case and hold that there was a valid driving<\/p>\n
 "iicence possessed by respondent No.1 effective as on the<\/p>\n
3 is<\/p>\n
-13-<\/span>
\ndate of the accident i.e., 31.12.2090. This point is therefore<\/p>\n
answered in favour of the appellant and against the insurer,<\/p>\n
:6. The other issue to be considered is wViti\u00b0..’.[reg_aVrd_<\/p>\n
the position of the claimant. Was he a fare payiV_’n’g_vp’a.ssenge’r,cg9″t,_<\/p>\n
a n0n~fare paying passenger or\ufb01ga perm ‘:acvc_oi:ip._a’nyginAg<\/p>\n
goods. It is assertively urged on be’h_aif of therinsiirer t’i”:at’g<\/p>\n
the ciaimant has to be con.stru_Ved_ aslla.  paying
\npassenger because the’  lper\ufb02the permit,
\nhas oniy one seating   ~\ufb01j-(‘;V.l:lf’JVlA’i’7:1…:vv\u00bb.,?lwh\u20ac%’\u20acfOF’\u20ac, it was
\nurged that pegi-fsoinh  is averreci and no
\nother  vehicle. It was also<\/p>\n
urged that ‘even.’ii-fit’it’i’s__:p~re’suiTied that the claimant was<\/p>\n
accornpanyiijg  Apex Court has held that he<\/p>\n
 S|’iOL!.l\u00a7g travel only:Vin the cabin. Since in this case, he could<\/p>\n
 \u00bbno’t-.hav_e rt.ra.\\\/e-!.led in the cabin as there was only one seating<\/p>\n
  not be covered under the policy. Reliance<\/p>\n
_V is p’l”acet\u00a7_o’ri”:the decision of the Apex Court in the case of<\/p>\n
“”A4′”K._gri1Ty_i\u00a3o””‘Ir\\iom INSURANCE CO.tTD., vs SURESH<\/a> i<.K. AND<\/p>\n
—  (2008 AC} 1741). He has also placed reliance on<\/p>\n
-19-<\/span><\/p>\n
the decision lo the case of ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY<\/p>\n
LTD, vs oeviiaeoov KONDA REDDY AND OTHERS i,w1p”(‘2oo3)<\/p>\n
ACC 214]. Reliance is also placed on the oecision\u00ab..i.n_A\u00bbt’h_e”,jcase<\/p>\n
of NEW INDIA ASSURANCE co,i.To., vs_H\\!Eowig:i’Ti’4 %A’i\u00a7.;5″<\/p>\n
omens (CD3 2oo7 SC 187) and themdeciasion’iinttf’ieV.,ca’se or<\/p>\n
NATIONAL INSURANCE co.L”rb._, vs4t?Ho.1_i_ET::,.r:iiArtAt;a;ivii\u00a7iA.,T<\/p>\n
AND omens (co; 2oo7 sc  to co,nt’end tat except<\/p>\n
driver and cleaner wh0i_”a,_re _;’3ermi~t:te,d”-tyo be carried in the
\nvehicle, no other person is’i~c_ov”,e’red u.n’cie:’r.t’i.ie policy, be it a<\/p>\n
fare paying or;ho’n.:fareiioayinro pas’se’n..g_eVrf.’<\/p>\n
:7 ….  _W’ve_V”i1a-:~g:e,, i;e’st.oVwed..__our?serious concern to these
\npoints V’:.;rg*e{\u00a7.. V’Vl’\\i’fe:Aessa’r.iVliy*,.. ezwminatioa of the terms and<\/p>\n
conditions””a_’nld,vcovenants;-‘of the insurance policy becomes<\/p>\n
 imp.o.ijtant to det:i–de the issue.\n<\/p>\n
  is no dispute that the policy issued in this<\/p>\n
caseiis a. policy and not Act policy. The said policy is<\/p>\n
  Reading of E><.R.1 reveals that, apart from<\/p>\n
V."v'.co1l_e:t:'ting the basic premium prescribed by the ?RCA, the<\/p>\n
__i_r\u00a7surer has collected additional premium to enlarge its<\/p>\n
(34% i<\/p>\n
-13-<\/span><\/p>\n
liability and to cover certain category of persons. One such<\/p>\n
endorsement that we notice reads as follows:<\/p>\n
Add:for LL to persons employed in conner\u00a7t.i’on’r’.’.j’L:’—- ‘V’ <\/p>\n
with the operation and\ufb02or loading, LJHlO.a.dV_l:F’l=\u00a7x  .<\/p>\n
,_<\/p>\n
Motor Vehicle wt 17, premitilh c’ollepcted.;-is.  <\/p>\n
19. The learned co__Lin..sel,  r_ef”e,rrihg’:_:””i:o this”<\/p>\n
endorsement, contends lihat  tpretmmrri collected
\nis for the purpose of  the driver of the
\nvehicle and none:’el_se.  is advanced
\non the  not covered under
\nthe Act premium was collected.\n<\/p>\n
It is to”t_alh\/i  of the conspectus of the<\/p>\n
provisions of-.i;he Act. A’To*:remind ourselves, we need to refer<\/p>\n
 to tt}’e3’\u00ab:.pro:vis%ioris”ofSection :47 of the Motor Vehicles Act. It<\/p>\n
V’V re  psi’:   K’<\/p>\n
“*147.’.V-v’Re.i}iliremerits of policies and limits of<\/p>\n
V’.””!ial)Vi:lit’y”.f~ (1) in order to Comply with the<\/p>\n
to  recygirements of this Chapter, a policy of<\/p>\n
V’ V. _ \ufb01insurance must be a policy which-\n<\/p>\n
3%<\/p>\n
..{.1..\n<\/p>\n
(a) is issued by a person who is an<\/p>\n
authorised insurer; and<\/p>\n
(b) insures the person or classes of<\/p>\n
persons specified in the policy to the extent.<\/p>\n
specified in subwsection (2}~<\/p>\n
U)<\/p>\n
V ‘pp bjl place;\n<\/p>\n
against any liability;…which_–‘\u00a5na’;,{‘_jbe”~l<\/p>\n
incurred by him in re.sp\u00e9:ct-clef.’ <\/p>\n
death or bodily _in}ury..to–._any ypte;rs:on’,<\/p>\n
including owner’-v.yp4o’f..ythe “globes  <\/p>\n
authorised reprye.se’nta’tiye carried _in
\nthe vehi’cl._effyor c–l_an\u00a7a\u00a7lje~.._toy”any property<\/p>\n
of a third par_tyl’y”c’ausedlV”by:ojr arising<\/p>\n
out’ of the \u00bblu_’s.:e ..o’ff”_the’ vehicle in a<\/p>\n
, by [\u00a71:\u00e9”{\u00a7_\u20aca_tl’l of or bodily ingliry to<\/p>\n
= a’ri_y”‘:_pas’s–enge–r of a public service<\/p>\n
 \\i’ehi:;|e’.c:ae…sled by or arising out of the<\/p>\n
Iuseof the vehicle in a public place:\n<\/p>\n
 a policy shall not be required-\n<\/p>\n
 (i)_”‘toyA:cover liability in respect ef the death,<\/p>\n
arising out of and in the course of his<\/p>\n
it lkemployment,<\/p>\n
of the employee of a person<\/p>\n
“insured by the policy or in respect of bodily<\/p>\n
gs?\u00bb<\/p>\n
-15..\n<\/p>\n
injury saistainea by such an employee arising<\/p>\n
oat of and in the course of his employment’-“‘–.g<\/p>\n
other than a liability arising under<\/p>\n
Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 -1-\n<\/p>\n
1923) in respect of the tieath of,  <\/p>\n
in}’ury to, any such employeey”\n<\/p>\n
(a) engaged in driving the yehicieylor<\/p>\n
(b)<\/p>\n
(C<\/p>\n
(d<\/p>\n
)<\/p>\n
if it is a public service y”e.h”iicIe
\nengaged as con:~dg::ct0r.Alo’f the it
\nvehicle or in exa’m\ufb01ign.in’g._tii–.t:l<et'sta,i3AFl.d
\nthe vehicl_e, or  ' l  <\/p>\n
if it is;algolods'cama*ge';~=b'eing._…..:A<\/p>\n
ca rri ed ;'i n the' "vein i cl ego r~~.\n<\/p>\n
\\
\nJ<\/p>\n
V to,gvcoy_e”r ;c’;.:;g_y_ co_n’t.ra’ctua.l_”_ <\/p>\n
iiiiabilitylfgg_s__  \u00bb<\/p>\n
E><pla"n._atiovnV.\u00b0~For  removal of doubts, it is<\/p>\n
herebyad'ecV_lar'edx'that the death of or bodily<\/p>\n
v-i._.i'n}'2,,L'1ry"i-to any"""person or damage to any<\/p>\n
 a third party shall be deemed to<\/p>\n
-.__l’ia”ve’A_’jbeegn”caused by or to have arisen out of,<\/p>\n
“‘~..the_*’t:s’e of a vehicle in a public: place<\/p>\n
n”o.ti\/igeithstandirig that the person who is {lead or<\/p>\n
it Vll”‘\u00e9n;’:ired or the preperty which is damaged was<\/p>\n
“not in a public: place at the time of the<\/p>\n
gab<\/p>\n
-1!)-\n<\/p>\n
acciaeht, if the act or omission which led to the<\/p>\n
accident occurred in a public place.\n<\/p>\n
{2) Subject to the proviso to sub–section  <\/p>\n
policy of ihsL.iraht:e referred to in subwsectiiimei”7″<\/p>\n
(1), shaii cover any liabiiity ihc.u.r_red  i<\/p>\n
of any accident, up to  foe?-lioy\\ivin’g,..’liir\u00e9*\u00e9–its’,=if-,__. <\/p>\n
namelyr<\/p>\n
(a) save as provided in claiiselibe),<\/p>\n
the amount of liability iriiciii-‘Vredz; <\/p>\n
(b) in respectvof cla’i'”\u00e9iage:tVo’ by
\np ropert\u00a7:..V of\u00e9e’ t.tii.Vrt’i. pa_rty,_ il.in*iit <\/p>\n
of rupees”‘S_i><. t.fiG\u00bbu4.S'"rii:li\u20ac\u00a7i  <\/p>\n
ivProvi_dee..'vVthat.Aaiw.v"';3__oli_cy' of insurance issued
\nwith anvlimited'l:_iVa_bilit\u00abv'r\u00bbar*id in force, immeaiately
\nbefore 'the =e:ornrr\u00a7en'c.ellmei1t of this Act, shall<\/p>\n
C.Q'i':1t'vii"i'L!\u20ac to'"b.eV effective for a period of four<\/p>\n
 \u00ab.Arnont'h}s after such COlTlfTi\u20ac'flCEEi}"\u00e9\u20ac\ufb02t or till the date<\/p>\n
  ofu._su,ch policy whichever is earlier.<\/p>\n
(3)  A .._;jol~i.Ac::i,\/A shall be of no effect for the purposes
\ndf,q__t3i1is Chapter unless and until that is issued
\nVl"~.l3y the insurer in favour of the person by whom<\/p>\n
"the policy is effected a certificate of insurance<\/p>\n
\u00a7t'Qv\/<\/p>\n
(4)<\/span><\/p>\n
..]’7..\n<\/p>\n
in the prescribed form and containing the<\/p>\n
prescribed particulars of any condition subject<\/p>\n
to which the policy is issued and of any otherfh-,T
\nprescribed matters; and different for;”i”i’sV:,”z””-V <\/p>\n
particulars and matters may be prescribed”iAn”V–.,i’L:’~–..f ‘V’ <\/p>\n
different cases.\n<\/p>\n
Where a cover note issued by,ftjhe–_ <\/p>\n
under the provisions of this4’iCh’a_pter >o;rA”the<\/p>\n
rules made thereunder–.i__s*..;_jot foEl_ow.ed’-.2by”a'” <\/p>\n
policy of insurance V\\!l’C|”lllj___l:’tVl””.\u00bb.FjZ’_ p.r_escri’b’-edv_tiin?e,
\nthe insurer shal’ly_4_.”t\u00bbwith’iAn \u00a7.se’ven.VVl”t\u00a7ays of the
\nexpiry of the period ofthe’ya%idii_ty’iAA.of’li’t_he cover
\nnote, notifyiithe ra:’\u20aci:o  r’evg.iVsteri’v;i’cj’authority<\/p>\n
in whos.e=.retjo_rc;s-tiie’v_ehi\u00a2;.lej;to v\\i’h’i’ch the Cover<\/p>\n
note relates.__has*..b’e\u00bbe_riregistered or to such<\/p>\n
other State Government may<\/p>\n
prescribe.- V  A<\/p>\n
‘Notyvithstandin-g–\u00ab’anything contained in any law<\/p>\n
 ._fo.r the.._t’i’m_e being in force, an insurer issuing a<\/p>\n
“7___g)o’li:ciy,_of:’ir’i”suran<:e under this section shall be<\/p>\n
 lia_bi~e_3t.oA indemnify the person or classes of<\/p>\n
persons specified in the policy in respect of any<\/p>\n
if 'lanliability which the policy purports to cover in<\/p>\n
-13-<\/span><\/p>\n
the case of that person or those classes of<\/p>\n
persons.”\n<\/p>\n
20. From the extracted portion of the pro-x\/i<si,_o-\u00abns*,,A'of<\/p>\n
Section 147, it is clear that in respect of the .g'ootls::"y,\u00e9hi,cl–'e,2<\/p>\n
the insurance company is statutori.!y~l.i.a,ble.'_'toVvV'cotker."th'e', <\/p>\n
against death or bodily injury to the dnriver,:dt:le'a.ner, <\/p>\n
tznloader anti employees offthe iotszirettf Vizioextenth<\/p>\n
provided under the,' Woryk-then-Ts"–~..,' Con\u00e9p-ensation Act.
\nUndoubtedly, the di'iver'kUf,the_v\\}eliic'le.f_a,nd other employees
\nnamed in the pr_o'vi._sioh_"VaVrie' "Vstat?J'toi'ily". Once the
\ninsurance po'licy.__is:..i.s;sueo_._a;s–\u00bb..i_s 'r'etV\u00a7uirVed under Section 146 of
\nthe Act, the.Vinsti-:fa'nce*~_:co.rripany has no escape, but to<\/p>\n
indemnify the"insuretl,'ag,aiiist the claim from driver and other<\/p>\n
 categ{oryi*~of persons mentioned in the provision. Hence,<\/p>\n
V_.there ES',li'C)r"~-\u00a3'\u00a7iJ\u20acStlOl'l of any additional pramizgm being<\/p>\n
co|l'e.cted'to–__c'o,ver the such risk. Of course, the insurance<\/p>\n
con1x4pan'y,'c'a"n collect extra premium to enlarge its liability<\/p>\n
 otherwise statutorily restricted to the claim under<\/p>\n
—  ti1e”Wo;*kmen’s Compensation Act. To this extent, collection<\/p>\n
49-\n<\/p>\n
of extra premium is \u00a7}el’\u00a7’?”llSSlb|E. For the test to find out<\/p>\n
whether the premium collected is to enlarge ‘{h\u00a7S’_l”i”Eibl|ity<\/p>\n
more than the statutory limit provided or does<\/p>\n
other category of persons, we need to examine”‘tsheacla\u00e9usein <\/p>\n
the policy itself. The insurance “o,ei’ng-Via<\/p>\n
transaction, terms and conditions ‘ofhthe  ‘bin’d”‘the=,<\/p>\n
parties. In the instant case’V,2a”s refeVr’red”=tVo above, the<\/p>\n
insurance company has;:coyllect’eHcl’i;4y5;.j_Vl\u00a7V,i”i:y.additional premium
\nspecifically indicating  employed in
\nconnection wit;’ti”oip_e’rat%:on   unloading of the
\nmotor   category of persons
\ncoverecvi’iV”l’3<y"rtihfeu  cuovllvec\u00e9ting additional premium
\nexcluding. thedr'-iyver:y,:_ho–.V_:i:s\u00bb\u00bb:si:-atutorily covered under the Act<\/p>\n
as referred4\u00b0toV_V'aii:io've;'i. Therefore, it is for the insurance<\/p>\n
'lV'"comipany-ii.to"–spell oi..i"t;'"as to cover the risk of which category<\/p>\n
 had collected Rs.\u00a75\/–. The insurance<\/p>\n
coni.p'Vanyv.i.s'totally silent on this aspect. It is for this reason,<\/p>\n
 ha'ye__A'3~to apply the doctrine of contra proferentum to<\/p>\n
,,,.i'1nter.pret this clause. Since an attempt is made to contend<\/p>\n
thiat this clause refers only to the risk of the driver, we are<\/p>\n
\u00a7.Q\u00bb\/<\/p>\n
-20-<\/span>
\nconstrained to hold that it is to be interpreted in favour of the<\/p>\n
insured and also to hold that it covers the riS\u00a7< of peitsons<\/p>\n
other than the driver like those who are e;:i~,ol'oy.ed'.j'_fo.r<\/p>\n
loading, unloading and for the purpose of {i'i<":_1.l'yr_i_?t':(\u00a7iJa'iiA.A_(t.::'el.'('}i" trie <\/p>\n
vehicle.\n<\/p>\n
21. At this juncture, ‘it.uis._i’hateriVaiVto’l..vi’iQ.f\u00e9….r.hajt their’<\/p>\n
insurance conwany avaified full_.!.i:oAerty’i..\u00a7efore’the Vfiiiriburial to
\nresist its liability  who has been
\nexamined as l?{.W:.’1,__   hytisttociilar testimony
\nbefore the   stotmunexplariatory in his
\nversion   restriction in the gaolicy to
\nabsolve\ufb01ythe’  in fact, he makes no<\/p>\n
mention oi”the additione;al.:’ij.\u00bbi’eihium coliected and the purpose<\/p>\n
 for  c~ollectio”n..:mihoiigh it may not be necessary, for the<\/p>\n
[?Ll:F’pQS:3.’Ofv\u00a2lE.i’_l{y, we feel it appropriate to extract the<\/p>\n
 by hirn, which is as follows:\n<\/p>\n
‘j”The vehicle in question insured with the
\nrespondent insiirance company was a<\/p>\n
goods carrying vehicle meant for carrying<\/p>\n
527\/<\/p>\n
-35-<\/span><\/p>\n
out<\/p>\n
of goods and the petitioner was an
\nunauthorised passenger in the said vehicle<\/p>\n
and his risk is not covered under theft’.\n<\/p>\n
relevant policy. The vehicle in qeestio_ri’_:”is”U-..l’
\nmeant solely for carrying of goods
\nperson is allowed to travel “in the   <\/p>\n
vehicle.”\n<\/p>\n
22. It is therefore cleartlnat the in’-suilrasncei company
\nitself has not placetl V –h\u00e9fr’Qrei._  “C_O%li2r’ti_\u00bb\u20acltliel’ a specific
\ndefence or substantive ev!.cl.e:nce-.toy p’o’int”‘oL;t’ that this policy<\/p>\n
is only to the l..p’i’ovi’d’es. It is to our<\/p>\n
the policy is uncioubtedly a<\/p>\n
e><amination -we. :'foun:i \u00ab..t'li'a"ti\u00ab.<\/p>\n
package polir:y'l'a.'nVd.V_once._it'=i,s_ seen that it is a package policy,
\nthen subwlsectiion   "\ufb01lial? comes into operation which<\/p>\n
mandates': "Ilia-tint\/it'l1st\u00e9rnding anything contained in any<\/p>\n
 law 'l'f:1r:"'.lt:l:e"\u00abijime being in force, an insurer issuing a '<\/p>\n
Apoiicfyli under this section shall be liable to<\/p>\n
V V' _ indemnify -the person or classes of persons specified in<\/p>\n
Vly\ufb02zewsypolicy in respect of any liability which the policy<\/p>\n
-33-<\/span><\/p>\n
purports to cover in the case of that person or those<\/p>\n
classes of persons. ”\n<\/p>\n
23. Thus, it is clear that the categoryg…_o4f.V,’p’ei:so’n.s<\/p>\n
merztioned in the policy for whose risi< aC\u00a7ditiOJ\ufb013:|: <\/p>\n
collected are of different category";\/Mcilasse-as i\u00abt_i1e"'d\u00ab'ri\\n\/'er<\/p>\n
and hence, in terms of the ,po|icyr','s._the_ insurer"i.5'~|ia=?oie,v'to,,<\/p>\n
indemnify the insured against a;'n\u00a7,5":!aini iron': H<\/p>\n
24. We must furth*’e_r, r–iot\u00a7.jCe :a’p_art from an that is
\nreferred to, the case to”  rhore than simpler.<\/p>\n
The C|\u20aciii’HE3J.\u00ab’.t”*\u00bb.’|1i:\u00a7i%.\u00a7_-.’_ sp:e_i:ifi,Ca||.};fconter\u00e9ded that he was<\/p>\n
accoiripao\u00a7i’ng:i,5\u00bbtVhe’\u00bb;’i;jVoo_\u00a7is…:’_i.e., rm and Calf for transporting
\nfrom one destin’a.ti’onf.to’–~a:no.ti’ier. It is during transit that the<\/p>\n
unfortunate ‘”ar:_r:ider2t occtirred. He therefore claimed to have<\/p>\n
‘V’\u00ab.\ufb02CC’o.|hpianie*(‘1&thehgoods. The provisions of Section :47<\/p>\n
‘t._,e’S<t.era'ct:ed.._h"Vh'a,ho;ue undoubtedly covers the person<\/p>\n
ac{;o_h1pa~ny_i'n–g the goods as also his representative.<\/p>\n
V"\u00bb\u00bbThereFo.ij_e, statutorily also, the person accompanying the<\/p>\n
\u00b0 .g'oor\u00a7_fs is covered.\n<\/p>\n
3.97<\/p>\n
-23-<\/span>\n<\/p>\n
25. The question now is whether cow anti calf carried<\/p>\n
in the vehicle can be taken as goods. An attempt is made by<\/p>\n
the insurer to contend that carrying of small size avnimlals or<\/p>\n
small quantity of goods does not give bene\ufb01t’\ufb02of._:_Vsocix_<\/p>\n
protection. It is relevant to refer to the clefi_o~iti\u00bbo_r\u00a7’~ol”*g:ooos_as.. <\/p>\n
found under Section 2 clause (13) \\:A{?3lC:h.,i:\u00e9a”Cl,,S f<\/p>\n
“Goods” iocliioes Ii\\vre.st’o._ck, and’-an’g{t?\u00e9~–5;r\u00e9”g”” it<\/p>\n
(other than ec;__uiprnenVt_._ol=vdinarily .osed_AAvyitl1
\nthe vehicle} ciarr-ied–‘_xbyVla~..__veh!c|e except
\nliving oersons, butgoesnot_-~i\u00ab.n%:lA:j’Vdegluggage
\nor pei’son’avl_eff;acts  r”riotor car or<\/p>\n
in ai…t’-;ail\u00e9:lr__\u00ab.attache\u00a7 to .motor car or the<\/p>\n
  passengers travelling in<\/p>\n
 It  clear that goods statutorily include<\/p>\n
 l.ivestocl\u00a7.~.. I.Ijx”‘~EhE3 instant case, cow and calf carried in the<\/p>\n
i}ehi.c.le V”be’i_’e.g  stock is covered under the definition of<\/p>\n
V–Vgooos 7″\n<\/p>\n
av<\/p>\n
27.<\/p>\n
-34-<\/span><\/p>\n
When this provision was confronted to the<\/p>\n
learned counsel for the insurer, he responded relying vor”:,Rule<\/p>\n
74 or the Motor Vehicle Rules which reads thus:   <\/p>\n
74.<\/p>\n
t (al<\/p>\n
Carriage of animals in goods
\ncattle shall be can’ie<:i::';in \u00bba"go"ocls' –veli.iVcl,e""iVVn_ a
\npublic place LIWESS."    i it  it
\n(A) in the case olfigoat, sheep._dleer'-:or\u00ab.p.ig–f~<\/p>\n
{l} a mihimt.iml"'~\u00ab\u00a7loo_r  C132 square
\nmetre  stitch' cattle is
\np ro  d ed i'i:.,th\u00a79  l.e"s~;.\n<\/p>\n
(ll) <\/p>\n
 _\u00e9’.atle_;i_aVnd  A. l’ V’<\/p>\n
V proper’-a’rjra’rig”e_rheVnts”for ventilation are<\/p>\n
 “double decked goods<\/p>\n
V A I: e  it:l:\u00e9. –\n<\/p>\n
‘deck flooring is covered with
\nVV:”:e_e4t:a|\u00bb~sheets with a minirmgm height of<\/p>\n
‘V   tmzs. raised on all four sides so as to<\/p>\n
piavreilt the animal waste matter such as<\/p>\n
  urine, litter, etc., falling on the animals on<\/p>\n
.”‘V”t\u00a7”ie lower deck;\n<\/p>\n
proper arrangerhents for drainage are<\/p>\n
made on each floor;\n<\/p>\n
wooden battens are provided on each floor,<\/p>\n
(C)<\/p>\n
to prevent slipping of hoofs of the animals.<\/p>\n
air<\/p>\n
  { 1}  V.\u00bb <\/p>\n
.'”?-1<\/p>\n
{8} in the case of any other cattien<\/p>\n
(ii) a minimum fioor space of 2m><1m per
\nhead of cattie and half of sa.:c_h floor
\nspace for a young one of cattle  is<\/p>\n
weaned is provided in the ve.hi,Cl\u00bbe.}'a-"r~ <\/p>\n
(ii) the lead body of rm?’ Velhviclie::_””isi”\u00bb<\/p>\n
constructed ofhistrong _vv”ooc\u00a7–ej;~.. ‘p*%ar1.ksvs.Vo’r”\u00bb<\/p>\n
of iron sheets::,with..a f}rn’i:ni”‘ii.ji_3*i’h”h’ei_g htof<\/p>\n
1.5 metres me\u20ac:.sui*ed fr\u00a3}’i’.’IjI:’t’lie floor, of,<\/p>\n
the vehicIe_,,:’on__all sicies’  tVi’i,e’V’b’ac:k;\n<\/p>\n
(iii) floor’ i3atta__ns’\u00bbv,_ai”e_, prolvieciecl  prevent
\nsli’;\u00a7.o’i’:i=ig   _\n<\/p>\n
(iv) every ‘proj’ectioi’i_.-.l_ilVi<e'lfyto cause suffering
\nif -._to  and<\/p>\n
 cattle a–rc?f .p'roVoeVr|y secured by ropes<\/p>\n
X" V3'\u00abtyie'{%,:Vto,,__th.esides of the vehicle.<\/p>\n
Exolanatioii.,_"\\i{Eatt4|"e.fl."for the gorooses of this setvrule<\/p>\n
Vinclzgdesyigoat, A's_he"e@, buffalo, bail, ox, cow, deer,<\/p>\n
~~i,hq;_?se, ponAy,\u00abri11_tii,-a, ass, pig or the young ones thereof.<\/p>\n
 '-{Ell "I'\\".l:V(4Z1"'~AV&.'3Vlll|17\u00e93l belonging to or intencieti for a circus,<\/p>\n
, 4<\/p>\n
Q"-.,'i-nena"g_e'rfie' or 200 shall be carried in a goods vehicle in<\/p>\n
 a .:)'tiE3li\u00ab-c place unless:\n<\/p>\n
air<\/p>\n
~l()~<\/p>\n
(i) in the case of wiid or ferocious animai, a
\nsuitabfe cage, either separate fr”o.m or<\/p>\n
integrai with the read body of <\/p>\n
used of sufficient strength  the<\/p>\n
anirnai secureiy at ali ti_i’:n.e_s’=i.sV’;:i:royide’d;._ <\/p>\n
and<\/p>\n
(ii) reasonable f\u00a7oo”rs;i~ac’e for’-each arai_f:m.afI’f-i.s<\/p>\n
providedm-\u00abthe venicie  <\/p>\n
(3) No goods ve”hi_c|e wh’er’i t_c’ar’r,r_i.’ng any”‘ca”ttie or any
\nanimal shaft be driyen-att_a}.spee’dV:i_inexcess of 24 krns.<\/p>\n
28. ‘T\u00a7jis;:_”‘Ruie’* \u00bbi:o”5′.’jwfi’ichi’ the” \u00e9earned counsei has
\nreferred; oniy”\u00a7.\u00e9.Stti%’]ates’a..;\u00a7’d deais in what manner \u00a7ive stock
\ncouid befcarried.’ fit:.fdVoe’s._n’o.t~”refer to prohibition of carrying<\/p>\n
of livestock in _ariy.f–ve’hici’e in any circumstance except the<\/p>\n
‘ “mini”.\u00b0riiJi’h*.re’*:;.tiiremeyfnfthat is necessary for the gaurpose of<\/p>\n
‘x’tra’rtiysb’or:t:i’n:g”tVh*e:iji.r\\\/estoci<. This proposition in defence by the<\/p>\n
insLir.anc:e-~co4ji:rripany certain\u00a7y is of no avail because the<\/p>\n
'q.uestio"ri.that we are deciding is whether cow and ca\u00a7f carried<\/p>\n
 i'i'n't_ifie}'vehicie comes under the definition of goods. Being<\/p>\n
.jsva__Eisfied that iivestock comes under the definition of goods,<\/p>\n
-37-<\/span>
\nthis COl”lt\u20aclltiOi1 which was admittedly not taker: before the
\ntribunal and is urged for the first time in this appeal is also<\/p>\n
worth rejection.\n<\/p>\n
.29. Having thus Concluded that livestocirwCa.r’;vf-egg}<\/p>\n
the vehicle was “within the rraeaning of_-goo..cis.’f’~iirmtadg:i’s’~. <\/p>\n
rnutandis, the provisions of SectienM}?b1ece.i’ne’s”-apn’ii\u00e9,.Ca~i?;ie<\/p>\n
and a gserson &3CC{}lT”l;3\u20acjl’.\\,\/ii'”lg’ zzueh goods V’oeco:.*n’efs’s_tatr.;toriE\\,r_ <\/p>\n
covered.\n<\/p>\n
30. A iast <A {jourt vi'r'i–.?._t-i'i"e decision cited<\/p>\n
by him,,'a   goods would be covered
\nunder thevpolicy \u00abto travel in a cabin in a seat<\/p>\n
provided a;34aurt,_:Vfrorr': theV"'driver's olace. Since the seating<\/p>\n
'lit"c:.apalei'ty1f'of 'this vehE'c'l'eV was only one, he submits that the<\/p>\n
""p.eVl'sio'Vncr a:'c-eo'n3ipa"ri.vrrig goods couid not have travelled and<\/p>\n
there,4fore,,.- ~the,re is no statutory coverage.<\/p>\n
"  In the decision relied upon by the iearned<\/p>\n
— clounsiei, what is considered by the Apex Court is different set<\/p>\n
gigs c<\/p>\n
-33-<\/span>
\nf’a<:ts. The Apex Court noticed that along with goods, the
\nperson was found to have carried a luggage. Besides,_.-he was<\/p>\n
not travelling in the cabin along with the driver, ljiJ'tl_w.a"s.,'in<\/p>\n
the carrier portion. In such circumstances, t–'–ii'e' \u00a3\\p,ex:"'Co:1–rtl'v.<\/p>\n
held that if a aerson were to claim\u00bb-.orot\u00e9ectyioni,';,i%\u00e9'd\u00e9ii thex'<\/p>\n
statute, he must not only accompany ";:goi'odsi"'-as <\/p>\n
also must be shown to ha–v,e'-._sat'"in__ vv.eh"i,cl'e'r~rwith an<\/p>\n
permissible seating capacity. j_T.-n-t.h_a.t"c.o.nte}< Court
\nheld that seating capaciityhgo-f .imp0rtaht. In the
\ninstant case,     conscious of the
\nfact that only'    vehicle, then it has
\nto  _c.ollVect extra premium to cover
\ndifferent"  like loaders, unloaders and<\/p>\n
ernployees in._,con\u00a7\u00e9ec.t-ion': with the vehicle. Therefore, the<\/p>\n
\ufb01"c'or\u00e9t'ei1tl=oin that coveirage of insurance is relatable to the<\/p>\n
  the vehicle is certainly untenable.\n<\/p>\n
 32′,’ For the reasons discussed above, we are satisfied<\/p>\n
 theiiclairhant COEEWES under the category of persons<\/p>\n
aw<\/p>\n
-30-<\/span>
\nagricultural activity is impossible so also his avocation of
\ncook. He does not claim to have any income from thelaoded<\/p>\n
property, but has assertively contended that hei’~.$\/:iral_s~~.Vvan<\/p>\n
agricultorist which invoiye physical fitness. We <\/p>\n
satisfied that the claimant has es_ta.bl_i_she;-1″t}ia-t’.’;Vthere.. is–.a\u00b0V <\/p>\n
relatable diminishirag effect in |”iis~.’eariring’*ca’p:a’city:’itr~..A.’i1.ije<\/p>\n
doctor has assessed the pliylsieazl disability A=\u00abE3_\u00ae–9z.’r~;H  the”<\/p>\n
whole body and therefore, y_|.ORS:s,__o\u00a7_v income has to be
\ndetermined keeping iii”‘-rni.ifio’.y  ‘4f”uccr’ir;:t’:io,nal incapacity to
\nwhich, the claim_a–nt tias”becomei.._yic’tir’n.7tiaviiig noted that<\/p>\n
loss of limb..hra”s44tlie:_ _effect__o’r_1. ea;-“nfi’n_ci through, manual labour<\/p>\n
is impovssiblel’The c:\u00a7\u00a7aii:*i’a’o\u00a7_’ WOlJ.|dWb\u20ac entitleo to 100% loss of
\nincome throtigh ._ag:ricilil~tu’re:” Since Coo\u00a7<ing also requires<\/p>\n
physical fitness', 'thatljobwsis also now impossible. We are<\/p>\n
. ."'ther'etoi'\u00bbe'A satisfiedthat even though the doctor has stated<\/p>\n
-physical::’d._i%s’ab”;s.|_it.$\/ of 80% of one limb, the earmng capacity<\/p>\n
inust ber~pro43portionate to it. =We find sufficient force in the<\/p>\n
V”‘\u00bbconten”t\u00bb\u00e9.Qn of learned Counsei for the claimant that the<\/p>\n
“-y”tr’i’b_o_n’al has been totally irrationa|- in taking 6% as the<\/p>\n
(},Qr<\/p>\n
“39-\n<\/p>\n
accornpanying the goods, covered statutorily under Section<\/p>\n
147 of the Act.\n<\/p>\n
33. The tribunal fell totally an error in a.h.\u00a7;gi.{ri.%.’gy’t<he<\/p>\n
insurance comgxany, without taking into consid"e.ratio*nlallthe <\/p>\n
factors discussed above. The directivoln'directi'ng_" to<\/p>\n
discharge the award is unsustainarble–._and we'.'fasten'"vthe.y<\/p>\n
insurance combany with iiabil\u00a7tyV'to inde'i'n_nify.'.tliev;insn\u00e9ed in<\/p>\n
respect of the award in 'ta.your"lof the c'l'a-%.rnant.VV"f <\/p>\n
34. With this, we”s%%a’ll Vconsidleir “determination of<\/p>\n
coinpensationi, -.f:l’ia._i_ni.a”int1:.2 has fA’.sL.ic’ceVssfi;lly established<\/p>\n
suffei’in{;;s ifof~.j5injni3\u00a7i4es_”a.n’d thus, has established nexus
\nbetweenvthe acciydent.’a’n.d*:%%”e injuries suffered by him and<\/p>\n
glerm\ufb01liyelit b’\u00a7’iysical.v”iiicaijahlcitation. The fact that the claimant<\/p>\n
‘ “has*suff.ered..an”:putation of one lower limb below knee and<\/p>\n
 limb and injuries to other parts of the<\/p>\n
body’ is fL;!.|\\\/4:{3\\Lfld\u20acl1C\u20acCl frorri the testimony of the claimant as<\/p>\n
 theft\/iedical Officer P.W.2 ~Dr.Suresh G. E:3hat. The<\/p>\n
  “‘\u00ab\u00a7:\u00a7’vid_e’iE;ce is so clear that it fully establishes the claimant is<\/p>\n
_n_o5w physically wrecked. Having lost one lower limb,<\/p>\n
a,.l.’\u00bb~<\/p>\n
~3i~
\npercentage of physical disability in respect of the injuries<\/p>\n
suffered by the claimant.\n<\/p>\n
35. At this stage, the learned counsel for <\/p>\n
wouid submit that be it as it may,.even cl-l’a4ii%\u00e9’an:tc <\/p>\n
suffered any physical disability, rheaisabriiility\ufb01ii’mvLis.i\u00a7 he<\/p>\n
terms of the schedule prox\/ici~ed tinder_tiaVe”‘v._;V\\i”oVrl<'\u00a721en'scV<\/p>\n
Compensation Act.\n<\/p>\n
36. We regrettallzlij\/–.raota} insurers have<\/p>\n
misconstrued the’- yery;”Vc’o’r’icent graht” of compensation<\/p>\n
under the  it\/l:e’;hicle3_A_ ‘Act -..anti  indulged in litigus<\/p>\n
 is either deliberately or
\nintentionalvly’–ign’o.rin\u00a7i’wtih’e_:1l’a.c~t that the claimant \/ appellant<\/p>\n
has SQlI_ght cl’ete’rr’ninati’ono? compensation under Section 166<\/p>\n
 “of thie’:’Miotor-yehiclieshct and not under the provisions of the<\/p>\n
 ~Cforn”_i:ensation Act. They seem to ignore the<\/p>\n
p;~o’v._isioii,s.’?lf”kction 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act which<\/p>\n
T3″~’\u00abi___”-mandates: that \u00e9etermination of compensation and aware<\/p>\n
 7V.”2:I”7iJS’t:’A.’A-be “just”, Therefore, the tribunal was required to<\/p>\n
gggir<\/p>\n
-32-<\/span><\/p>\n
‘<\/p>\n
award Compensatior: just’. Compensation, neither high nor<\/p>\n
low.\n<\/p>\n
3?. We therefore disapprove the –‘-th’e_<\/p>\n
insurance Company in trying to impede the “pii\u00abe.{jess”‘wof– _gz’antA <\/p>\n
of ‘Just’ compensation by uiitenabie de\u00abfencee..as. taken’-ss._abA-ave<\/p>\n
which we have rejected.\n<\/p>\n
38. Coi’nir1Q tdytiijs za\u00e9lic-i~,–;a,?’ifd\u00e9te’rniin”atio.nfiwe notice
\nthat 80% physicai disa4’i’3i’i’ity evaiuated in
\nreiation to whovie.::\u00a73o.dv  the ciaimant to
\nCarry out  business with the
\ndisabiiif:VV\\,’r’  wi:\u00a7.Li’:’ti”Viae appropriate to take his
\nloss ofvearniing  We have to determine the<\/p>\n
ii1COiT:H’3_VWhi”Cuf1 _the..’i:\u00a7aii’ifria”nt had prior to the a<:<:ident. The<\/p>\n
"vi"vrwo"b:t..a:vdACati"ot.ns w\u00a7ii'C'h"Vhe has stated has not been disputed<\/p>\n
_ai*.d,itrsisjwerii"e.st_abiished, at the modest caicuiation he wouid<\/p>\n
iiot._.hVave.h–ad_.eilarnitzg of less than Rs.3,OOO\/A per month. The<\/p>\n
V'-\u00bbtribunai_hIas again uereaiisticaiiy taken his income at Rs.70\/\u00bb<\/p>\n
"""pero_d\ufb01.ay and on that basis, determined the compensation.<\/p>\n
 set aside the said mode and rnethodoiogy and we take<\/p>\n
Ni<\/p>\n
~33\u00bb
\nthe income at Rs.3,008\/\u00bb pm. and 36,080\/\u00bb pa . The age of<\/p>\n
the claimant at the time of accident was 53 years the<\/p>\n
multiplier applicable would be 11, Therefore, <\/p>\n
income wi\u00e9l be Rs.2,77,2{}O\/\u00bb- which we 3Wa.l".d'_"l\ufb01i}.Od~Al'fy'\u00a5.'ljgntl'leV "~.__<\/p>\n
award of the tribunal.\n<\/p>\n
39. Since it is a case_.relatin’gto.. personal”irijur–y,”the-g<\/p>\n
claimant has to be compensateds.,fo\u00bbr loss of ae\u00e9eiiillties, loss of<\/p>\n
enjoyment of iife, towards’f. rei-nfibearsementii of medical
\nexpenditure, future rnedicaltrveatiineovtawsalso the artificial
\niimb, conveya:’i’c*e.,V,:p,’diet, attend’antf_”e.haVrfges and above all,<\/p>\n
towards pain a_l-it}. su’ffer4i”rl,’\ufb01:_’;V,,'”\\4\\l\u00a7: a”r,e”‘satisfied from evidence<\/p>\n
and other \u00abattentJiif’i’-cg,’4ci.,rc’u{n’g.tances that the Tribui\u00e9al has not<\/p>\n
awarded a’ro_’oorvtio’n_a4t’e fC):””‘L_,L”c3’ll”I and suffering the claimant has<\/p>\n
 endmfed as a\u00a3so”o.nVother heaas. Therefore, we award to the<\/p>\n
 cla’im,an_t: a –:;,,u”m__ of Rs.30,000\/w towards pain and suffering,<\/p>\n
?<s.V'S–O,,O'{}G,?_'%-__'towards medical expehditare, conveyance,<\/p>\n
.q attelndanvce"charges and special diet, Rs.25,{}OO\/W towards<\/p>\n
 ':'s.l,o"sst..of alnwenities of life, Rs.-40,000,\/– towards future medical<\/p>\n
efrolenlses and replacement of artificial limb, In all, the<\/p>\n
at\u00bb<\/p>\n
.34-\n<\/p>\n
claimant wouid be entitied to a sum of RS.43r,22,2OO\/- with
\ninterest @6% on the enhanced compensation as against the<\/p>\n
sum of Rs.1,28,840\/~ awarded by the Tribunai.<\/p>\n
40. We set aside the direction of the <\/p>\n
regard to payment of compensation by the”_in”s..i}re:d’\u00bband”yye’<\/p>\n
direct the amount of compensaVtiion”toVRae-3  the<\/p>\n
insurance cczmpany within a T._oeriod’..oi’-._si:< w'.\u20aciyei<s "fro*fn"vthe.<\/p>\n
date of receipt of copy of this
\n4}. Out of the'aymounjtoftc'o.ij'ht5'e-hsation" ayvarded, we
\ndirect 70% amount withp'ro_po.rtViriirzateiin't:-erwest to be kept in<\/p>\n
Fixed  of five years, but the
\nbaiancevvihannoant' ~i3bir'0i3:.:C5'\u00bbrt%~onate interest to be {laid over to
\nthe ciai.n}Aant'f  A V V<\/p>\n
"ii%'Aj3'peaE..ystandsmdiisposed of in terms of this order,<\/p>\n
  it   _ V
\n1 y – _ Sd\/I-\n<\/p>\n
JUDGE<\/p>\n
Sd\/-\n<\/p>\n
JUDGE<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Shivarama Parameshwara Hegde vs Subray Honnappa Naik on 1 April, 2009 Author: K.L.Manjunath And Rahim _;- IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD DATED THES THE DAY OF APRIL;2~@\u00a7}~\u00a72 __’_ .:’ PRESENT THE HONBLE \u00a5V1R.JUST’;j CE AND ‘ THE HONBLE MR.j”t3\u00a7T”\u00bb:CE 3A’wA”L3\u00abVRA”H\u00a71M MESCELLANEOUQ ‘:21RS7’i’}5\u00a7;:%’r>\u00a7g;J,;”‘F’:=eQ.262’3A\/\u00e90o\u00ab:;{M\\;3 @ sHivARAMA\u00a7.vPngg:.1ME\u00a73H\\\u00a7\\m}~i2A’\u00ab%{‘Et;aE_. 5A A6355 _ […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-161357","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nShivarama Parameshwara Hegde vs Subray Honnappa Naik on 1 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shivarama-parameshwara-hegde-vs-subray-honnappa-naik-on-1-april-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Shivarama Parameshwara Hegde vs Subray Honnappa Naik on 1 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shivarama-parameshwara-hegde-vs-subray-honnappa-naik-on-1-april-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-03-31T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-11-11T11:28:34+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"34 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shivarama-parameshwara-hegde-vs-subray-honnappa-naik-on-1-april-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shivarama-parameshwara-hegde-vs-subray-honnappa-naik-on-1-april-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Shivarama Parameshwara Hegde vs Subray Honnappa Naik on 1 April, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-03-31T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-11-11T11:28:34+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shivarama-parameshwara-hegde-vs-subray-honnappa-naik-on-1-april-2009\"},\"wordCount\":6788,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shivarama-parameshwara-hegde-vs-subray-honnappa-naik-on-1-april-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shivarama-parameshwara-hegde-vs-subray-honnappa-naik-on-1-april-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shivarama-parameshwara-hegde-vs-subray-honnappa-naik-on-1-april-2009\",\"name\":\"Shivarama Parameshwara Hegde vs Subray Honnappa Naik on 1 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-03-31T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-11-11T11:28:34+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shivarama-parameshwara-hegde-vs-subray-honnappa-naik-on-1-april-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shivarama-parameshwara-hegde-vs-subray-honnappa-naik-on-1-april-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shivarama-parameshwara-hegde-vs-subray-honnappa-naik-on-1-april-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Shivarama Parameshwara Hegde vs Subray Honnappa Naik on 1 April, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Shivarama Parameshwara Hegde vs Subray Honnappa Naik on 1 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shivarama-parameshwara-hegde-vs-subray-honnappa-naik-on-1-april-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Shivarama Parameshwara Hegde vs Subray Honnappa Naik on 1 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shivarama-parameshwara-hegde-vs-subray-honnappa-naik-on-1-april-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-03-31T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-11-11T11:28:34+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"34 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shivarama-parameshwara-hegde-vs-subray-honnappa-naik-on-1-april-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shivarama-parameshwara-hegde-vs-subray-honnappa-naik-on-1-april-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Shivarama Parameshwara Hegde vs Subray Honnappa Naik on 1 April, 2009","datePublished":"2009-03-31T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-11-11T11:28:34+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shivarama-parameshwara-hegde-vs-subray-honnappa-naik-on-1-april-2009"},"wordCount":6788,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shivarama-parameshwara-hegde-vs-subray-honnappa-naik-on-1-april-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shivarama-parameshwara-hegde-vs-subray-honnappa-naik-on-1-april-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shivarama-parameshwara-hegde-vs-subray-honnappa-naik-on-1-april-2009","name":"Shivarama Parameshwara Hegde vs Subray Honnappa Naik on 1 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-03-31T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-11-11T11:28:34+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shivarama-parameshwara-hegde-vs-subray-honnappa-naik-on-1-april-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shivarama-parameshwara-hegde-vs-subray-honnappa-naik-on-1-april-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shivarama-parameshwara-hegde-vs-subray-honnappa-naik-on-1-april-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Shivarama Parameshwara Hegde vs Subray Honnappa Naik on 1 April, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/161357","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=161357"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/161357\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=161357"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=161357"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=161357"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}