Usha vs Nagesh K on 21 January, 2020

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Usha vs Nagesh K on 21 January, 2020

Bench: P.S. Dinesh Kumar

                            1



     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

        DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2020

                        BEFORE

       THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR

     MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.3497 OF 2012 (MV)

BETWEEN :

USHA
D/O SURESH GATTI
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS
R/AT YADUNANDANA COMPOUND
1ST CROSS, KAPIKAD
ULLA VILLAGE & POST
MANGALORE, D.K, PIN-575 005                 ...APPELLANT

(BY SHRI. G. RAVISHANKAR SHASTRY, ADVOCATE)

AND :

1.     NAGESH K
       S/O K. POOVAPPA
       MAJOR
       R/AT YASHODA NILAYA
       ALAPE, PADIL POST
       MANGALORE, D.K, PIN:575 007

2.     THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD
       BR III, ESSEL CHAMBERS
       III FLOOR, KARANGALPADY
       MANGALORE, D.K, PIN:575 003
       REPRESENTED BY ITS
       BRANCH MANAGER                    ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SHRI. R. JAIPRAKASH, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
    VIDE ORDER DTD.17.10.14 NOTICE TO R1
     IS HELD SUFFICIENT)
                            2




     THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 28.12.2011 PASSED IN MVC
NO.462/2008 ON THE FILE OF MEMBER, MACT-III & II
ADDITIONAL   DISTRICT    JUDGE,    DAKSHINA   KANNADA,
MANGALORE PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR
COMPENSATION     AND     SEEKING     ENHANCEMENT     OF
COMPENSATION.

     THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-

                     JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the claimant challenging judgment and award dated 28.12.2011 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal ('MACT' for short), D.K., Mangalore, in MVC No.462/2008 awarding a global compensation of Rs.10,000/-.

2. Shri G.Ravishankar Shastry, learned advocate for the appellant submitted that Tribunal has recorded a finding that claimant was traveling as a gratuitous passenger in a Tempo trax. The insurance policy covers any passenger who was travelling other than for hire or reward. He placed reliance on a decision of 3 this Court in United India Insurance Co.Ltd. Vs. Kalawathi and others1 to support his contention and submitted that the insurer is liable to indemnify the owner.

3. The facts stated by the learned advocate for the appellant are not disputed by the learned advocate for the insurer.

4. The Tribunal has awarded a global compensation of Rs.10,000/-. After due deliberations, learned advocate for the claimant and insurer jointly agree that claimant is entitled for an additional global compensation of Rs.30,000/-.

5. Their submission is placed on record. This appeal is accordingly disposed of by awarding global compensation of Rs.30,000/- to the claimant in addition to what has been awarded by the Tribunal. 1 2011 ACJ 1831.

The insurer is directed to deposit entire compensation amount of Rs.40,000/- before the Tribunal within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Upon such deposit, the amount shall be released by the Tribunal in favour of the claimant.

No costs.

Sd/-

JUDGE Yn.

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court