IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER, 2010 BEFORE TI-IE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE _ Misceiianeous First Appeal No. 4625 A * 2 BETWEEN Yogeswaran, S/O. Iyyanar, Aged about 50 Years, R/A No.12?!/84, Kadirappa Road, ~ , _ 4*' Cross, Doddigunta, " _ ' Cox Town, - BaI1ga10:re--36Y A " --. __,Appe11ant (I,-".%:',r--Srt.' 8: Harish L, Adv.) AND A A A A A The « BMTC "D,epartment, ' < K H:L_F'._0ad, Shanthinsgar, Lsangalore 5 27. Respondent A ' Vijayakumar, Adv.) MFA is filed U/S 173(1) of MV Act against the Judgment and award dated: 7.9.2007 passed in MVC 83.63/2006 on the file of the V Add}. Judge, Court 2 Of 'Small Causes, Member, Mact, Mayohall Unit, _MM,3etropo1itiar1 Area, Bangalore, [Sceh.N0.20), dismissing " the claim petition for compensation. Q' This appeal coming on for Hearing, this day, the Court, delivered the following: JUDGMENT
-II’
This appeal is by the claimant for
compensation awarded by the Tribunal. ‘
2. Heard.
3. For the sake of convenienoe parties referred to
as they are referred loefore the
Tribunal. V B V. B B
4. Brief ‘
That claimant was Walking
on thellliflft Frazer town, Bangalore, a
BMTC _bus °’oeari1ji’g rcgistlration No.KA–01–F»»2369 Came
and liilegiilglent manner and dashed against
the claimant fell down and sustained
ir1ju.r__ies_..- he filed a claim petition before the
‘ ” . – l’ Bangalore, seeking compensation of
A -. The Tribunal by impugned judgment
..and award has determined compensation of
Rs.50,200/–, but dismissed the Claim petition on the
Vi”
ground that the delay in lodging the complaint to the
Police and the accident is not explained.
5. Claimant has preferred this appeal challenging
the award, both on the ground of dismissing tlfiie–,
petition as accident is not established, and ‘
compensation awarded is not justan-dp pifoperfl’, it
6. The point that arises for7co’n_siderat,ion, in
appeal is, whether Tribunal..,,,:is.,pjustifi.ed=.in_; it
the claim petition on accident is not
established and Whether . of_.con1pensation
determmedc, and’-.reas’on'”:ble or does it call for
enhaneeInen’t._ ‘
7. Learned,, appearing for the claimant
sublnits, on {ill-“l”l+.Q_6.*when the claimant was walking on
‘ the -Vl.ei’ti.,sidvei.AofLazar road in Frazar Town, the offending
BMTC buiicame in a rash and negligent manner and
dashedldagainst him, as a result, he fell down and
l”l:V’_s1istained injuries. immediately he was taken to
Santosh Hospital with the help of a Police Constable
Q/..
attached to Frazer Town Police Station and A.S.I.
Siddappa. He was provided treatment as out patient
and sent to home. As he was suffering from fex;er4:_:and
pain, he could not lodge complaint and after§V_:recoiz’e:ri1ig_T’ .
from fever, he lodged the complaint ll”
Police against the driver
22-11-06. Further. helll._v’contini;ed . as * it
inpatient in Bowring, and “Hospital from
29-1 1-06 to 7-12-06′. l’i:as.vcommitted an
error in dismissing the ground
that holding he failed to
explaintiive. Police and he further
submitselven compensation awarded is not
just and properand-._he”diVsubmits, if the judgment and
the Tribunal are set aside and the matter is
e__remittedi,[l1e «co_i,1ld examine either the traffic Police or
the,1i\.S,;E.,l:”Siddappa attached to Frazer Town Police
V’~.__'”Station,V__lwho accompanied him to Santhosh Hospital
and also some independent witness to the accident.
Whereas, learned Counsel appearing for the
BMTC submits he has no objection for remanding the
matter, but it should be done with a condition that
interest should not be awarded from the date of claim
petition till day.
9. In the wound certificate — EX.P.5 issuedjby
Santosh Hospital, it is stated, claimant
injury in a road traffic accident
accompanied by a traffic Police
Town Police Station. In the medie’all’i*ecor:is’
to Bowring and Lady .£jIos2pitali_””also, it is
mentioned, the c1ain1~a_nt_h_as;_’sustained injuries in a
road traffic accident. II-scythe cerr:pl’aint’at’tached to FIR —
E3X.P.iI, ‘h:as….ex.p’iained the reasons for the
delay and Tribunal has
committed ah-A.__jerror. in not Considering the same.
claimant has to establish the fact that he
‘i:as..Vr’siistain(;’d’i injuries in a road traffic accident
‘V occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the BMTC
examining some witness to the accident.
Therefore, it is just and proper to set aside the
u “impugned judgment and award and remand the matter
to the Tribunal for reconsideration. While doing so. it is
proper to direct the Tribunal to reconsider the matter
even with regard to quantum.
10. Accordingly, appeal is allowed. K V’
award of the Tribunal is set “The
remitted to the Tribunal a direction
the same after affording oppo’rt:u»nity to~.tlie-V’claiinant to
lead additional evidence, to the
BMTC to cross eVxamine_._f’ A
11. All the p parties are left open.
Tribunal “is. directed A reconsider the matter,
both as well as quantum.
12. Consideringp Sm-atter is of 2006, the Tribunal is
the claim petition within six
date of receipt of a copy of the
judgment. T ” ‘T
T’ ‘=._No”order as to costs.
mgm JUDGE