Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Karnataka High Court

Rajegowda S/O Doddegowda, vs Praveen K C S/O Chandregowda, on 5 June, 2013

Author: N.Ananda

Bench: N.Ananda

                            1




     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

          DATED THIS THE 05TH DAY OF JUNE 2013

                         BEFORE

           THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANANDA

                 M.F.A.No.2953/2011 (MV)

BETWEEN:

RAJEGOWDA
S/O DODDEGOWDA
AGED 50 YEARS
R/O MAKAVALLY GRAMA
MARAGODANAHALLY POST
HOLENARASIPURA TALUK
HASSAN DISTRICT.                       ... APPELLANT

(BY SRI G V NARASIMHAMURTHY, ADV.)

AND:

1.     PRAVEEN K C
       S/O CHANDREGOWDA
       NO.21/2, HOSAKOTE, KANEGERE
       ALUR TALUK.

2.     BAJAJ ALIANZ INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.
       LAKSHMI COMPLEX, 2ND FLOOR
       OPPOSITE TO B.S.N.L., B.M. ROAD
       HASSAN.                         ... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI O MAHESH, ADV. FOR R2; R1 - SERVED)


      THIS APPEAL IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 15.10.2010 PASSED IN
MVC NO.91/2008 ON THE FILE OF THE FAST TRACK JUDGE,
MEMBER MACT, HOLENARASIPURA, DISMISSING THE CLAIM
PETITION FOR COMPENSATION.
                                  2




    THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:


                              JUDGMENT

The tribunal has dismissed the claim petition. Therefore, claimant is before this court.

2. I have heard learned counsel for claimant and learned counsel for insurance company.

3. It is the case of claimant that on 09.04.2007 at about 7.15 p.m., the claimant and his son were standing near Hasanamba Circle, at that time, motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-46/E-1364 ridden by its rider at high speed came and dashed against him. The claimant suffered injuries and he was shifted and admitted in District Hospital at Hassan.

4. The tribunal has dismissed claim petition on the ground that first information relating to accident was lodged on 23.05.2007 after a period of 1 ½ months from the date of accident. The complainant had not offered valid explanation for the delay. On the other hand, he pleaded excuse on the 3 ground that rider of motorcycle had requested him to settle the matter out of court and not to lodge a complaint.

5. The evidence of PW.2-Dr.Poornachandra would reveal that there has been alteration in the entries in MLC register (copy marked as per Ex.C1). It is seen from the contents of copy of MLC register that claimant was admitted in District Hospital at Hassan at about 9.20 p.m., on 09.04.2007. He had been taken to hospital by his son Sathish. He had given the history of injuries as 'due to RTA, collision with motorbike near Hasanamba Circle at 7.30 p.m., on 09.04.2007'. Subsequently, the numerical indicating registration number of vehicle has been scored off. Further, the place of accident 'Hangarahalli Circle' has been over written to make it appear as 'Hasanamba Circle'.

PW.2 has admitted that, on the date of accident, claimant had been taken to District Hospital at Hassan. He has also admitted that injured had not informed the matter to police. The hospital authorities had sent the medico-legal report to the jurisdictional police. He has admitted that place of accident was written as 'Hangarahalli Circle' and it 4 was altered as 'Hasanamba Circle'. He has also admitted that entries made in MLC register 'due to fall from motorcycle at 7.30 p.m., on 09.04.2007' are scored off and over written but, he is not able to give the name of person/Doctor who had altered and over written the entries in MLC register.

6. The tribunal on critical analysis of evidence on record has come to a right conclusion that documents relied upon by claimant are not credible and he has failed to prove that on 09.04.2007 at about 7.30 p.m., near Hangarahalli Circle he was hit by a motorcycle bearing registration No.KA- 46/E-1364 and suffered injuries in the road traffic accident.

7. On reconsideration of the matter, I do not find any reasons to interfere with the impugned judgment. The appeal is dismissed.

Sd/-

JUDGE Np/-