{"id":240071,"date":"2010-11-10T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-11-09T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-narasimha-murthy-vs-sri-syed-yunnus-on-10-november-2010"},"modified":"2016-08-11T07:06:11","modified_gmt":"2016-08-11T01:36:11","slug":"sri-narasimha-murthy-vs-sri-syed-yunnus-on-10-november-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-narasimha-murthy-vs-sri-syed-yunnus-on-10-november-2010","title":{"rendered":"Sri Narasimha Murthy vs Sri Syed Yunnus on 10 November, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Sri Narasimha Murthy vs Sri Syed Yunnus on 10 November, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: S.N.Satyanarayana<\/div>\n
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE\n\nDATED THIS THE mm pm? OP' NOVEMBER, 2o10: Q\n\nBEFORE:\n\nTHE HONBLE MR. ..}\"{}STICE s.N.sA1YANgg1_2A\u00a5A3~1A~ \n\nM.F.A.No.6849 or 2906  s , *\nCM   \nM.F.A.No.6906[2006,[M_1\ufb02\nM.F.A.No.6904f20()6 (MV-3.  \n\nM.F.A 6849[ 2006:\nBETWEEN:\n\nSri.N'arasimha, Mufthy  N\n8\/0 late Poojappsa  ' ._\nAged about .':'-O'  '\n\nResiding at C'h0wt13.ha]Ei.Vi1}f3ge,=-- \nKundama__\u00a3_10biia,\"\" V1. __ V  V' \" \nDevaI:ahal1i\"'I'aJ\u00a7;Lk,     M\n\nBangalore I)_\u00a3'3t1f1(:i'.. ~.._\u00bb  \u00bb  _ ' - ..APPELLANT\n\n{BY sR1.N.GQupALAKRis'H='NiA; ADVDCATE)\n\n  ' Sri.3ys<\u00e9\u00a71.'1.'yi11r1us\nLs\/so syed%<3a:\u00a5a:L sab,\n\nVeg\u00e9:t_ab1\u00e9' \nMar%,1tl'1i E<3_xie:1\u00a73i0n,\n\n,.  \u00a7 Ma11ir-Town -&"Ta1ux,\n . _ _' V E\ufb01olar Distr;fct..\n\nA '~   M'\/s.ChoIamandalam M.S.\n\n"W\\\n\n\n\nGenera} Insurance Co.Ltd.,\n9\/ 1, Ulsoor Road,\n\nUisoor, Sivan Chetty Garden,\nBangalore ~ 560 042\n\nRepresented by its Manager. ..RESPONDENfF\u20ac;. f  A'\n\n(BY sRI.0.MAH1:sH, ADVOCATE FOR 1:21\u00ab:sP01\\I'Ij"i;N'1~i[.Aj1*\u00ab'o.2,T' \n\nRESPONDENT No.1 SERVED BUT UN_R,EI?RESENTf3D_} V'<\/pre>\n
THIS MFA FILED UNDER “\u00bbAsEcT:<:)1\\{e\u00bb._'1'7\u00a7\u00a7'(1j" ii"01f<.j
\nM.V.ACT AGAINST THE J'UIe)Gl\\\/IENT AND AWAI.<';D 1;~A'1"'\u00a3',Dw<\/p>\n
16.12.2005 PASSED IN MVC N'o.\u20ac\u00bb_444\/2004V0N_ T1E{E…FILE
\nOF THE IV ADDL. JUDGE, MEMBER 'MACT,
\nMETROPOLITAN AREA, BANGAL()-RE, {SCCH.–{5], PAR"['LY
\nALLOWING THE CLAIM  1?ET1T:0NA _jFOR_ COMPENSATION
\nAND SEEKING i\u00ab'UR'rf;*:1E\u00a3-2  A .E3N.Ei'ANCEMENT OF
\nCOMPENSATION.\n<\/p>\n
MFA 110.6906\/2os)6:.__<\/p>\n
BETWEEN :\n<\/p>\n
Sn’.R.Kr1’$hn.apf)a_ ‘ ”\n<\/p>\n
S\/0 iate RaII13i'<i'l'1' , e .4
\nAged about 32 yea:'s;"-.AA "   V ~-\n<\/p>\n
Residing at C2′:0wdaha11i._Vi11age;”
\nKur1ciamaH(‘3h_Ii; , ” _ V
\nDevanaha1liTai-uk,  <\/p>\n
_ Bangalpre 1:>iss;:-1c”t.~  ..APPELLANT<\/p>\n
  (By s;\u00a7I.N:’L\u00a7Q\u00e9A\u00a3,AKR1s;-INA, ADVOCATE}<\/p>\n
I .S1:i.Syed..__’Yu nfzus<\/p>\n
_  ‘ S_\/0 Syed Gafffar Sab,
\n” ‘A \u00bb  — Vegetable Merchant,
\n ‘ Maufuthi\u00e9 Extension,<\/p>\n
Malur Town & Taiuk,
\nKoiar District.\n<\/p>\n
2.M\/s.ChOla_mandaIam M.S.\n<\/p>\n
General Insurance CO.Ltd.,<\/p>\n
9\/ 1, Ulsoor Road,<\/p>\n
Ulsoor, Sivan Chetty Garden,<\/p>\n
Bangalore — 560 042   j ” ”\n<\/p>\n
Representeci by its Manager. .\u00a7RESPON’I_)\u00a3*3\u00a7N'{‘S_  _ A’<\/p>\n
(BY sI21.O.MAHEsH, ADVOCATE FOR’\u00bb.PRESPONm:1\\:’r I\\i’O’.*2,”*
\nRESP()NDEN’.1’No.1 SERVED BI’IT\u00ab~IfNREPRE3SEN1′{\u00a7D}…,  . *
\nTHIS MFA IS FILED UNDER”S.ECTION 173(1) OF MV
\nACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT’ – AND–._AWARD “DATED
\n16.12.2005 PASSED IN ‘am\/’jc: NO.\u20aci514-5;’23004.\u00bb\u00bb()N THE FILE
\nOF THE IV ADDL. J[JD<}E.,? __M-F11'-.([vBER, MACT,
\nMETROPOLITAN AREA, B,ANOAL()m3,' "'{sC<:H~6), PARTLY
\nALLOWING THE ;;j:LA_1M PE'1'1TION'~..'F()R 1':OMPENsAT1.ON
\nAND SEEKING  mRi1*HER  ENHANCEMENT OF<\/p>\n
C()MPENSATI{)1'I;\n<\/p>\n
M.F.A 690 A”g2c.Vi:_(‘:_~\u00a7; ‘:2;  ”\n<\/p>\n
BEYWEEN;  ‘V <\/p>\n
Sri.Ar1}a.nappa=, ‘ ._  ~’
\nS \/ 0 late: ‘ Chikkaf1il1_fliSha,IIE\u20acipp3<\/p>\n
, Aged 3u~EI.:QL1t.32 years’, A  _____ .. v<\/p>\n
. F<esidi11g at-; 'C1"iOwdaha1li Viilage,<\/p>\n
Hebli\u00e9,  <\/p>\n
{3eVa.nah:11Ii'– \u00ab.'_Falufi:,V
\nBan-gaiore Disigric\ufb01. ..APPELLANT<\/p>\n
 V -(BY sn5"I.n;.GOPA1A1:R1sz-INA, ADVOCATE)<\/p>\n
AND:\n<\/p>\n
1. .Sri .Syed Yunnus<\/p>\n
S \/ 0 Syed Gaffar Sab,
\nVegetable Merchant,
\nMaruthi. Extension,
\nMalur Town & Taiuk,
\nKola: District.\n<\/p>\n
2.M\/S.Ch0lamanda1arn M.S.\n<\/p>\n
General In.Sura.n.ce C0.Lt(i.,
\n9\/1, Uisoor Road, –\n<\/p>\n
UIS001′, Sivan Chetty Garde
\nBangaiore — 560 042
\nRepresenuzd by its Managexj.\n<\/p>\n
7<\/span><\/p>\n
 5;_;R1ES1\u00e9oN13E\u00a7\\1TS”\n<\/p>\n
(BY SR1.o.1~AA1e1I\u00ab:S1~1, ADVCCA1′:\u00ab;,%’Q12 :’R1ajS1\u00a70NDENT No.2,<\/p>\n
% RESPONDENT N0. 1SERVED”BU’1*.U1qREPmS\u00abENTEI>)<\/p>\n
TI–IIS Mm 5f:-E,JUDG-MVI$N’r_ AND AWARD DATED
\n16.12.2005 pA.SSEi::1′ IN Mvtz No_.6z14i5\/2004 ON THE FILE
\nOF’ ‘I’HE””‘  MEMBER MACT,
\nME’l’ROF1OLI_’\u00a3’AN=.”A.REA, ‘\u00ab.BfxN_(}AL.ORE (SCCH–6}, PARTLY
\nALLOWING THE_C\u00a3;A{M.1_PEf1’ITION FOR COMPENSATEON
\nAND SEEKING  “\u00abFUR”1–‘.1_{1:ER ENHANCEMENT 014’
\nCOMPENSA’I}~Q1\\1’v. -_ A <\/p>\n
 Vv1.MISC\u00a3i3LLANEO[IS FIRST APPEALS COMING<\/p>\n
 O,’N,F~-SR .1#1N.A1. HEARING TRIS BAY, THE COURT
\n‘=I)ELIVERE_1)” T1vz,1_5;R0LL0w11eG:<\/p>\n
W1<\/p>\n
J U DGMENT<\/p>\n
The claimants in MVC 6444\/2004, 64454\/’2.t)o\u00e91;i,tA’<\/p>\n
6446\/2004 are impugning common Judgment _a;i1d  *<\/p>\n
dated 1612.200-5 on the \ufb01le of Motor__ AccieIetits’;v.Ciai’ms  <\/p>\n
‘l’ribur1aI, Bangalore wherein while 7-I’<\/p>\n
for compensation. the couit ‘~..t)eiow~.. has iiiapijmftioried<\/p>\n
contributory negligence to the claiiiia,i1tsV_at 3O%.i_a”.r1c1 saddled
\nthe liability on the owner  iIi._sui’e.t ‘Gif’good_s auto involved<\/p>\n
in the accident at 70\u00b0\/0.    ‘V<\/p>\n
2. ‘I’};;e’   these appeals are as
\nurider:–  ….\n<\/p>\n
on –.16.{)5′;i5′{g’f):{l .iat\u00abja’nsz)aoi~t 7.30 RM. all the three<\/p>\n
claimants weyelltravelliiig  motorcycle which met with an<\/p>\n
 aecidefitiv against goods\u00e9vearrying auto bearing No.KA–08\u00bb<\/p>\n
   the\u00e9\u00e9said accident, the claimants suffered injuries<\/p>\n
V _co1n;iex1sa._tion;”\n<\/p>\n
for  \ufb01led aforesaid claim petitioas seeking<\/p>\n
‘W1<\/p>\n
person sits in a place meant for only two it would de\ufb01nitely<\/p>\n
cause difficulty for the rider and discomfort to pillion rider:s”;\u00bbi<\/p>\n
6. Considering the fact that the accident 4′  <\/p>\n
place on a village road. which is narrow and 8 feet_vvinfw~idth l’ <\/p>\n
with 4 feet mud road on its   <\/p>\n
accident being twilight hour, the  <\/p>\n
exposing themselves to accident
\nsuch knowledge, all the (ria,i.rriants”‘iia3k:e’ Vt.’rav’e:led on
\nthe said motorcycle wiiichllhas  It is
\nalso seen that    due to collision
\nof the said   autorickshaw.\n<\/p>\n
The mahazar   available on record
\ndoes notiisay. xvaseiif\ufb01cient street light available in<\/p>\n
the place oi’ig,;(:cidei2t:’Vr.’. “tIn;:ler that circumstances greater<\/p>\n
 care  ircautioln required to be used by both the<\/p>\n
 rr,ioto_rcycl’e:sririer..and driver of the autorickshaw, when both<\/p>\n
aiie passiiig’ each other in a narrow road at such<\/p>\n
it _ hour;””–\u00abIncid’emf:’al1y there is no sketch prepared and produced<\/p>\n
hy..the police in the said proceedings. Therefore the way in<\/p>\n
\\\u00ab1\u00ab”‘<\/p>\n
10<\/span><\/p>\n
which the accident has taken place will have to be<\/p>\n
understood by the pleadings and also police documents.<\/p>\n
available on record. The police documents FIR,   <\/p>\n
does not clearly establish that the driver of the  1<\/p>\n
has come to the extreme right sidefof the road’  <\/p>\n
caused accident to the motorcycle on”v__vh’ich the’V_’claj.m’a.n.’:s”‘v<\/p>\n
were travelling.\n<\/p>\n
7. Per contra,  fr.ev;3o_I’t which is
\nproduced and  “\u00a7i.svvno1l:lsible marks of
\ncollision on tol.:dueirnoVnstrlr\u00e9gteVV_there was collision
\nbetween  said sautorickshaw. Under
\nthe circiiri1star1cesll’t:\u00abl<;j:r:1gConsideration all these aspects<\/p>\n
the court. below lhasl"ri_g.ht.ly  the contributory negligence<\/p>\n
_ on the aatorickshaw\ufb02at 7():% and on the claimants at 30%.<\/p>\n
V    appearing for the claimants would<\/p>\n
  subr1ait”llthat”‘xeeveii assuming that there is contributory<\/p>\n
 _ ‘4 ‘negligenoevlon the part of the drivers of both the vehicles, the<\/p>\n
  cannot be extended to the pillion rider. This court is<\/p>\n
“W1<\/p>\n
11<\/span><\/p>\n
not willing to accept this line of argument for the reason that<\/p>\n
admittedly the capacity of the motorcycle to carry passenger<\/p>\n
is two personsw one rider and one pillion rider, if  “~ 3<\/p>\n
wouid sit thereby it would canse inconvenience ‘iiot only to’  l<\/p>\n
the driver, but also to pillion. Tne 1en”at;z:r< :\u00a5i_seornfoiftl\u00abee.:z:;sed <\/p>\n
to them is bound to re\ufb01ect in the ride,:'–_nl\u20ac;re  <\/p>\n
road is as narrow as 16 feet "of.  feet
\nis meant for the use of  citcnnistences a
\nsmall Iniscalculation eithief the driver of the
\nmotorcycle or__   definitely result in<\/p>\n
accident.\n<\/p>\n
 ‘Ft:erefore:’-.\ufb011e'”contention of the petitioner that<\/p>\n
imposing cont1’i_b1n,oI:y’V.lyne\u00e9\ufb01gence on the part of the pillion<\/p>\n
  wrong}, ’tisinot\u00e9iaecepted. If only one of the piliion<\/p>\n
  hndciestrained himself from boarding the motorcycie<\/p>\n
:’tI’1ei.1_it  been convenient to the rider to ride the<\/p>\n
motorcycle  all care and caution so as to prevent any<\/p>\n
W H ”  a:ecitienVt”either by himself or to third party.<\/p>\n
‘W1<\/p>\n
12<\/span><\/p>\n
10. Title counse} for the claimants in support of his
\ncase would rely upon the following judgments: \ufb01I’St of  is
\njudgment rendered by Gwalior Bench of Madhya
\nHigh Court in the matter of l._In.ion of India VS  ‘
\nanother reported in 1997 ACJ 439,; whereinwith’i~s.’:vhelti’_’_as
\nunciertm I it A V ‘V l V<\/p>\n
“it is true that it has czome 1nv.evic1enc_e that..three
\nboys were sitting onthe”rnoped; butathatliloy itself
\ndoes not disentitie they ciaim foiatihe death of
\nVeeru, which” was eiai1s’ed’ir1″”the acciti’er1’t by the
\ntruck. It is Vnote-wo;xr1;hywthatrthei boys were going
\non a smali moped ‘t0,i;h;\u20ac te13f)v’p.i.\u00e92″in the town of
\nShivpuri, wl’1ich_’is a._bnsy”‘tow'”n_.*–  Rush is also
\nthereon. the main road’.g_ Byta mere fall on a
\ncul\u20ac\u00ab}ert};or on: the”gro\u00a3;n1_d’,”d’eath could not take
\nplace_, KI.-t5;7wa.s:_ finite exrirdent\u00bb from the facts and
\ncirczixnstaritresijf the case that the aforesaid<\/p>\n
 ——–   aging driven’ at a high speed with
\nIiegligent\u00e9e, otherxxrise this accident could not<\/p>\n
–.i1ave”‘take12eg pviace.’ In a market place, heavy
\nvel1icle”is” ~to”be’c14r.iven with great caution. It is<\/p>\n
 establishetilprinciple of law that heavier the
\nVo.liicle, greater the responsibility. In this
\neonte>gtTribunai was fully justified in recording
\na \ufb01ndingbased on evidence that the accident<\/p>\n
V laazl taken place by the truck which was being
\n “‘(_i\u00a3’.1A\\ft3I’.l rashiy and negligently killing Veeru on
\n. .Vtiie’sp’ot. Therefore. the \ufb01ndings of the Tribunal
\n‘ for} this point are con\ufb01rmed”.\n<\/p>\n
“”1\/”Lat<\/p>\n
13<\/span><\/p>\n
The facts and circumstances of this case are different<\/p>\n
from the fact and cireumstahees of the aforesaid case. Iiihtifie<\/p>\n
afore cited. case, the grant of compensation itself  <\/p>\n
challenged on the ground three persons   <\/p>\n
moped. In the instant case it is not the case..of the e1_ai-ma.i’1ts <\/p>\n
that the right to seek eompensatiori’.is:”t1enieci\u00a7_g Here  ”<\/p>\n
compensation is awarded fort
\nawarding c()n1pei1sation,the co1}r’t”iia_s  thevlviahility
\nof the driver of autorickshayv’   fastened
\nsum amount of ioii the part of the<\/p>\n
eiaimants.\n<\/p>\n
(ii). H    _ seeond judgment it is the
\njudgmenttoftthet of Gujarat High Court in the<\/p>\n
ease of  Vs Suclhaben Sukethu Sutaria<\/p>\n
 \u00bbreporteci””‘i:i 1980 AC.) 178. The facts of the<\/p>\n
“afo’reis’aisd’.this one are one and the same. Therefore<\/p>\n
the Apfesez1_t. is also distinguished in the similar way as<\/p>\n
 ‘ the earlier ‘ease was distinguished.<\/p>\n
W:\n<\/p>\n
14<\/span><\/p>\n
(iii) Coming to the third judgment is that of the Apex<\/p>\n
Court in the matter of T.O.Anthony Vs Karvarnan <\/p>\n
another reported in (2()()8)3 sec 748 wherein :.t\u00abiae’.y’Vi’X;\u00a7’\u00a75i,.:”‘ <\/p>\n
Court has distinguished between the coinpositeiiiegligttncex <\/p>\n
and contributory negligence in the process’ has 1i’edu:ccdw_ <\/p>\n
contributory negligence fastened on   50\u00b0’\/do V<\/p>\n
to 25%. In the instant case the iiegligence Between
\nof the motorcycle and that,of  is the
\ncontributory negligence   on the part
\nof the pillioii ificiet  vv’th:t: motorcycle in
\ntravelling   tyiiich is meaxit for two
\npersons  eachhne of the rider and as
\nwell as i’..pill.ionl.VV  responsible and have<\/p>\n
co’ntributed “to the negli_ge’nce in causing the accident which<\/p>\n
_ has tajiiierii. place whevtweera the said motorcycle and the<\/p>\n
  7–I%lowever the ratio laid down by the Apex<\/p>\n
 nohearing to the case on hand. infact in the<\/p>\n
 said fi*i.atte’i’,. contributory negligence that is recorded by the<\/p>\n
.’4″*..cotiI’tbelow: is not set aside it is only reduced marginally by<\/p>\n
3-vnkwl<\/p>\n
15<\/span><\/p>\n
the Apex Court while distinguishing between the<\/p>\n
contributory negligence and the composite negligejhee.<\/p>\n
Therefore the ratio laid down by the Apex  <\/p>\n
appiy to the facts on hand.\n<\/p>\n
(iv) Coming to the next judgment relied L.ipAo’r1- by”<\/p>\n
appellant which has been renderedby the  of
\nthis Court in the matter of Basavaiali “Vs..N.S.lAs’nok”v<Kuniar<\/p>\n
reported in 1985 ACJ xjiriiereiiiii' has held as<\/p>\n
ElI1d\u20acI'I-\n<\/p>\n
“‘lf’h’e”leame.d”coi;nsel ‘apprzaiihg for the claimant
\nsubrt_1ii_.ted “tha_t”thep_:11ateria.E on record is enough<\/p>\n
_ …. ..ctoV”estat3lish that_ it w-as..the car bearing No.}\\\/IEB<\/p>\n
V 73\u00a3\u00bb3;ywhi’ch catazsed the accident and that it was\n<\/p>\n
 –.d’river1il:3yA respondent No.2 in the petition. For
\nA. that he”.tjeiie’d._pu’pe’n exhibit P~2. Exhibit P~2
\n*contain’s_ all  proceedings in C.C.No.357 of<\/p>\n
__ 1981 before the Metropoiitan Magistrate, II
\n V  Court:-,.._VBahgalore City. The second respondent
\n  namely “i’v’I’u.qbooi was charge–sheeted in that
\nA , case for having caused the accident on<\/p>\n
.  “1.8v.Q8.~.l980 at about 9.30 a.m. The court
\n Wexpllained the charge to the accused and while<\/p>\n
‘doirig so, it stated thus:\n<\/p>\n
 “name and address of the accused person sent
\nup for trial:\n<\/p>\n
W<\/p>\n
16<\/span><\/p>\n
Muqbool S.A., s\/o Kasim Sab, aged 29 years,
\nR\/at 38\/2, 13″‘ Cross, Paciarayanapli-Ara,
\nBangalore, Driver of car MEB 732″: and when<\/p>\n
the charge was put to the accused, it is-‘<\/p>\n
him thus:\n<\/p>\n
“That on 18.08.1980 at 9.30 a.Hm4.’~\u00bb.at=a’bout
\nthat time along Vth Cross, Vth  Road,
\nMohammadan Block : in “the, ‘1 of
\nMalleswaram Police Station ;the”‘acc~u.se_d, jnetedj”.
\nin Col.No.4, drove the car No.MEB 732; from ee.;st7<\/p>\n
to west in a rash ai.id’i-negligent inan’r,_1er’-.s’o~’to
\nendanger human life “and dashed .?against a
\npedestrian CW II who”‘was.._ going in_ the same
\ndirection on the left;-:;i’t’1e of thee, road, as ‘a result
\nof which CW –IIffel1;down and sustained simple
\ninjuries on his p’erso.n’.X }_?liI’fll\u00a33I”‘__th\u20ac accused
\nfailed to give _rne_ci-ical. aid’ to fjhe injured and
\nfailed tolreport the i;=1atte:r’tojthezpolice about the
\naccigIentj..t.i’ ‘r:.ir:he: the _ac.cused”‘fajled to produce
\ntli_ie’it1sur.a.iice c.erti\ufb01_cate”‘;[  ‘<\/p>\n
V ….  V”T_h’e”1~acc1ised.._r1amely,*’Muqbool. respondent
\n‘ No.’2iin the c\u00a7.ai’.m_ petition, pleaded guilty to the
\n chargera:;nd”  ‘own plea of guilty he was
\n‘-.convicted” and”–sjente’nced. That being so, it is
\nc\u00ab1earthia_t lthejczar bearing No.l\\\/{EB 732 was
\n_ driven by.’-respondent No.2 in the petition in a
\nV rash “and negligent manner, resulting in the
\n_accident causmg injuries to the claimant.<\/p>\n
 j   substance of the finding of the Division
\nV V’ Beneh”~of this Court that is when once there is acceptance of<\/p>\n
”   t. the driver of the vehicle in. any criminal<\/p>\n
‘ML\/’rt<\/p>\n
17<\/span><\/p>\n
proceedings i.e., conclusive proof of rash and negiigence on<\/p>\n
his part and based on that. the court shouid \ufb01x iiabiiitgwon<\/p>\n
the driver. No doubt that principle is followed in ” <\/p>\n
case on hand. Arilmittedly in this case alsomthey  of <\/p>\n
autoriekshaw in a criminal proceedings initiated agaivris\u00e9vhiih <\/p>\n
has accepted that there is negligencevonlhis   it<\/p>\n
the accident. which is accepted;’-vi.e:.V:”0n  the
\ncourt below fastened the liabi’lity. \u00ab'(lriver”V:of the
\nautorickshaw to pay  consoriance
\nwith the decisiyont of of this court.
\nHowever whiie”   ‘icoxi\u00e9rtivbelowll has gone a step
\nfurther  coinmitted by the claimants in
\ntraveiiinigytogethelron which is involved in the<\/p>\n
accident in excess of its seating capacity and thereby being a<\/p>\n
 cause. the aceident. The court below while accepting the<\/p>\n
 liability of :t.}i\u00a3\u00a7’A.&!it0I’lCkShaW driver has also fastened certain<\/p>\n
ainoiinti oi’:’ii~eg_iiVge;nce on the part of the claimants herein in<\/p>\n
it _ violating t’he’n?iotor vehicle rules which restricted the use of<\/p>\n
iiiotorcyelcat. by more than. two persons. ‘ Therefore the<\/p>\n
E…_\u00bbi,,\u00bb?\n<\/p>\n
19<\/span><\/p>\n
In that View of the matter, the court below has rightly taken<\/p>\n
that there is contributory negligence on the part ofjjthe<\/p>\n
claimants. This court in the light of the  <\/p>\n
discussion, finds that there is no illegaiity or  1:13 <\/p>\n
the judgment which calls for inteI’fei’e’r;1eebi1*r’ this \ufb01rst.:_Ea;p;V}e:3;l\u00a7VVV _ <\/p>\n
Hence the appeals \ufb01iedsby ‘the Veiaivmehvts. are<\/p>\n
dismissed without any order as to (fest. <\/p>\n
SBN<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Sri Narasimha Murthy vs Sri Syed Yunnus on 10 November, 2010 Author: S.N.Satyanarayana IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE mm pm? OP’ NOVEMBER, 2o10: Q BEFORE: THE HONBLE MR. ..}”{}STICE s.N.sA1YANgg1_2A\u00a5A3~1A~ M.F.A.No.6849 or 2906 s , * CM M.F.A.No.6906[2006,[M_1\ufb02 M.F.A.No.6904f20()6 (MV-3. M.F.A 6849[ 2006: BETWEEN: Sri.N’arasimha, Mufthy […]<\/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-240071","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSri Narasimha Murthy vs Sri Syed Yunnus on 10 November, 2010 - 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\/sri-narasimha-murthy-vs-sri-syed-yunnus-on-10-november-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sri Narasimha Murthy vs Sri Syed Yunnus on 10 November, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-narasimha-murthy-vs-sri-syed-yunnus-on-10-november-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-11-09T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-08-11T01:36:11+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=\"13 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-narasimha-murthy-vs-sri-syed-yunnus-on-10-november-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-narasimha-murthy-vs-sri-syed-yunnus-on-10-november-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sri Narasimha Murthy vs Sri Syed Yunnus on 10 November, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-11-09T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-08-11T01:36:11+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-narasimha-murthy-vs-sri-syed-yunnus-on-10-november-2010\"},\"wordCount\":2499,\"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\\\/sri-narasimha-murthy-vs-sri-syed-yunnus-on-10-november-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-narasimha-murthy-vs-sri-syed-yunnus-on-10-november-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-narasimha-murthy-vs-sri-syed-yunnus-on-10-november-2010\",\"name\":\"Sri Narasimha Murthy vs Sri Syed Yunnus on 10 November, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-11-09T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-08-11T01:36:11+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-narasimha-murthy-vs-sri-syed-yunnus-on-10-november-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-narasimha-murthy-vs-sri-syed-yunnus-on-10-november-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-narasimha-murthy-vs-sri-syed-yunnus-on-10-november-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sri Narasimha Murthy vs Sri Syed Yunnus on 10 November, 2010\"}]},{\"@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":"Sri Narasimha Murthy vs Sri Syed Yunnus on 10 November, 2010 - 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\/sri-narasimha-murthy-vs-sri-syed-yunnus-on-10-november-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sri Narasimha Murthy vs Sri Syed Yunnus on 10 November, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-narasimha-murthy-vs-sri-syed-yunnus-on-10-november-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-11-09T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-08-11T01:36:11+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":"13 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-narasimha-murthy-vs-sri-syed-yunnus-on-10-november-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-narasimha-murthy-vs-sri-syed-yunnus-on-10-november-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sri Narasimha Murthy vs Sri Syed Yunnus on 10 November, 2010","datePublished":"2010-11-09T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-08-11T01:36:11+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-narasimha-murthy-vs-sri-syed-yunnus-on-10-november-2010"},"wordCount":2499,"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\/sri-narasimha-murthy-vs-sri-syed-yunnus-on-10-november-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-narasimha-murthy-vs-sri-syed-yunnus-on-10-november-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-narasimha-murthy-vs-sri-syed-yunnus-on-10-november-2010","name":"Sri Narasimha Murthy vs Sri Syed Yunnus on 10 November, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-11-09T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-08-11T01:36:11+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-narasimha-murthy-vs-sri-syed-yunnus-on-10-november-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-narasimha-murthy-vs-sri-syed-yunnus-on-10-november-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-narasimha-murthy-vs-sri-syed-yunnus-on-10-november-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sri Narasimha Murthy vs Sri Syed Yunnus on 10 November, 2010"}]},{"@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\/240071","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=240071"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/240071\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=240071"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=240071"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=240071"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}