Bangalore District Court
Praveen R vs E. Rudresh on 17 September, 2024
KABC020156622017
IN THE COURT OF XIII ADDL. SMALL CAUSES AND ACJM
AND ADDL. MACT., BENGALURU, (SCCH-15)
PRESENT: Smt. KUMARI SUJATHA.
B.Com., LL.B.,
XIII Addl. Small Causes Judge,
ACJM, Court of Small Causes
& Member,MACT15, Bengaluru.
MVC No.7076/2017
Dated this the 17th day of September 2024
Petitioner: Sri. Praveen R.,
S/o Ramesh,
Aged about 26 years,
Occ:Staff at Ideal Clinic,
R/o. No.74, 5th Main,
Giddappa Block, Ganganagar,
Bengaluru560 032.
(By Sri. Ketan S. Latur, Adv.)
Versus
Respondents : 1) Sri. E. Rudresh
S/o Eranna,
R/o. Kempapura Village,
Chikkabanavara Post,
SCCH 15 2 MVC No.7076/2017
Bengaluru560090.
(Owner of Milk Canter bearing
Reg. No.KA076827)
(Exparte)
2) The Manager,
The New India Assurance Co., Ltd.,
No.9/2, Mahalakshmi Complex,
2nd Floor, Opp. Ajantha Hotel,
M.G. Road, Bengaluru560001.
(Insurer of Milk Canter bearing
Reg. No.KA076827)
(Policy No.67230031170100002484)
(Valid:23.07.2017 to 22.07.2018)
(By Sri. D.M. Joshi, Adv.)
*****
:J U D G M E N T :
This Claim Petition is filed by the Petitioner against the Respondents under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act seeking Compensation of ₹20,00,000/ for the injuries sustained in a Road Traffic accident.
SCCH 15 3 MVC No.7076/2017
2. The substance of averments made in the Petition are as under:
That on 03.10.2017 at about 11.00 p.m., when the Petitioner was proceeding in his Motorcycle bearing Reg. No.KA04HF4317 from R.T. Nagar to Ganganagar and reached near Kotak Mahindra Bank, Dinnur Main Road, at that time, a Milk Canter bearing Reg. No.KA076827 driven by its driver came with high speed and in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against his Motorcycle from behind. Due to the said impact, he fell down and had sustained grievous injuries.
3. Immediately after the accident, the Petitioner was taken to V.Care Hospital, R.T. Nagar, Bengaluru and later he was shifted to Bowring Hospital, Bengaluru wherein he admitted as inpatient. The Petitioner had spent Rs.1,00,000/ towards his medical and conveyances expenses.
4. Prior to the date of accident, the Petitioner was hale and healthy and he was working as a Staff employee at Ideal Clinic SCCH 15 4 MVC No.7076/2017 and he was earning Rs.16,000/ per month. The accidental injuries have caused permanent disability to the Petitioner. The accident has occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the Milk Canter bearing Reg.No.KA076827 by its driver. The Respondent No.1 is the RC owner and Respondent No.2 is the insurer of the offending Milk Canter bearing Reg.No.KA076827. Therefore, both Respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the Petitioner. Hence, this Petition.
5. In pursuance of service of Notice to the Respondents, the Respondent No.1 remained absent and he was placed exparte. The Respondent No.2 had appeared before the Court through its Counsel and filed its Objection Statement to the main Petition.
The Respondent No.2 in its Objection Statement and Additional Objection Statement denied the age, avocation and income of the Petitioner and also the accident caused by the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle and also the injuries sustained by the Petitioner and the expenses SCCH 15 5 MVC No.7076/2017 incurred for the treatment. Further it contended that the alleged accident was not due to the rash and negligent on the part of the driver of the offending vehicle. The rider of Motorcycle bearing Reg.No.KA04HF4317 was sole responsible for the alleged accident. Further it contended that after thorough investigation, the I.O., has filed Chargesheet against the rider of the Motorcycle as accused No.1 and the owner of the Motorcycle as accused No.2 for handing over the motorcycle to the accused No.1 though having knowledge that the said Motorcycle does not had Insurance as on the date of accident. Further it contended that the MLC and other documents shows the history of accident as Road Traffic Accident of Skid and Fall from two wheeler. Hence, the said accident has occurred by the sole negligence of the Petitioner himself. Therefore, it is not liable to pay compensation to the Petitioner. On these grounds, the Respondent No.2 has prayed to dismiss the Petition against it.
SCCH 15 6 MVC No.7076/2017
6. On the rival Pleadings, my learned Predecessor has framed the following Issues:
ISSUES
1) Whether the Petitioner proves that he had sustained injuries due to RTA alleged to have been occurred on 03.10.2017 at about 11.00 p.m. near Kotak Mahindra Bank, Dinnur Main Road, Bengaluru, due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of Milk Canter bearing Reg. No.KA076827?
2) Whether the Petitioner is entitled for compensation? If so, what amount and from whom?
3) What Order or Award?
7. In order to prove the case of the Petitioner, the Petitioner got examined himself as P.W.1 and got marked 10 SCCH 15 7 MVC No.7076/2017 documents at Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.9 and Ex.P.14 and he has examined two witnesses as PW.2 and PW.3 and got marked 4 documents at Ex.P10 to 12 and Ex.P.13 and closed his side evidence. On the other hand, the Respondent No.2 has examined one witness as RW.1 and got marked 5 documents at Ex.R1 to Ex.R5 and closed its side evidence.
8. During the course of Arguments, the learned counsel for Petitioner has relied on the following decisions:
1) 2018(1) KCCR 351 (KANT) between Sri Yallappa Shivappa Sajali Vs. Ashok Ballappa Naik and Another.
2) 2021 ACJ 1309 (AP) between Vojje Mahankali Vs. Satyanarayana and Another.
3) 2020 ACJ 916 (KANT) between National Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs. Shila Debi and others.
4) 2011 ACJ 990 (KANT) (DB) between H.S. Swarnalatha and others Vs. Vice Chairman and Managing Director, Karnataka State Road Transport Corp.,
5) 2023 (1) SCC (Cri) 337 between Rakesh Arora and another Vs. Bharti Axa Arora and another.
SCCH 15 8 MVC No.7076/2017
6) 2013 ACJ 2544 (SC) between Minu Rout and another Vs. Satya Pradyumna Mohapatra and others.
7) 2018 ACJ 1437 (SC) between Suvarnamma and another Vs. United India Insurance Co., Ltd., and another.
8) 2018 ACJ 686 (SC) between Halappa Vs.Malik Sab.
9. Having heard the arguments of the learned Counsels for both sides and upon perusal of the depositions, documents exhibited and materials available on record my answer to the above Issues are as under:
Issue No.1 : In the Negative Issue No.2 : In the Negative Issue No.3 : As per the Final Order, for the following :
REASONS
10. Issue No.1: It is the case of the Petitioner that, he had sustained grievous injuries in the Road Traffic Accident that occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending Milk Canter bearing Reg.No.KA076827.
SCCH 15 9 MVC No.7076/2017
11. On the other hand, the Respondent No.2 had denied the accident occurred by the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending Milk Canter bearing Reg.No.KA076827.
12. In order to prove the case of the Petitioner, he got examined himself as P.W.1 and got marked 10 documents at Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.9 and Ex.P.14 and he has reiterated the Petition averments in his Chiefaffidavit. Ex.P.1 to 9 are the True copies of FIR, Complaint, Discharge summaries, Doctor Certificate, Photos, CD, Aadhaar card, Medical bills, Spot mahazar, Sketch, IMV report and Certified copy of Judgment in CC No.9052/2019 on the file of MMTCIV Court.
13. Upon going through the documents exhibited, Ex.P.1 and Ex.P.1(a) are the Certified copies of the FIR and Complaint which shows that on the Complaint lodged by the Petitioner Praveen Kumar S/o Ramesh S., the R.T. Nagar Police have registered the case against the driver of the offending Milk Canter bearing Reg.No.KA076827 for the offences punishable under SCCH 15 10 MVC No.7076/2017 Sec. 279, 337 of IPC. Ex.P.7 and Ex.P.8 are the true copies of Spot Mahazar and sketch which shows that the concerned police had drawn the mahazar and sketch at the spot in the presence of panchas. Ex.P9 is the IMV report which shows that the accident does not occurred due to any mechanical defects of the vehicles.
14. Further, P.W.1 has examined Dr. S.A. Somashekar as P.W.2. PW.2 has reiterated the injuries sustained by the Petitioner in the Road Traffic Accident.
15. In order to rebut the evidence of the Petitioner, the Learned Counsel for Respondent No.2 has cross examined PW.1 in detail. In the crossexamination, he admitted that he lodged complaint on the next date of the alleged accident. Further he admitted that the alleged accident occurred in the middle of the road.
16. It is the main contention of the Respondent No.2 that the alleged accident has occurred due to Skid and Fall by the Petitioner himself and in the said accident, the offending vehicle SCCH 15 11 MVC No.7076/2017 is not involved. Further it is the contention of the Respondent No.2 that after thorough investigation, the investigating officer has submitted Chargesheet against the Petitioner/rider of the Motorcycle as Accused No.1 and owner of the Motorcycle bearing Reg. No.KA04HF4317 as Accused No.2 for handing over the vehicle to the Accused No.1 knowing fully well that the said vehicle does not hold Insurance Policy at the time of accident. Therefore, the Owner of the two wheeler has also Charge sheeted for the offence punishable under Sec. 196 R/W Sec. 146 of IMV Act. Therefore, it is not liable to pay compensation to the Petitioner.
17. On the other hand, it is the contention of the Petitioner that, the alleged accident has occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Milk Canter bearing Reg. No.KA076827.
18. Upon going through the oral and documentary evidence and materials available on record, it shows that the Petitioner in SCCH 15 12 MVC No.7076/2017 order to support his contention has also examined one eye witness by name Sri Chandrashekar Murthy T.V., S/o. Late. Ventakappa as PW.3 and the said PW.3 has deposed that on the alleged date of accident, he was going in his two wheeler and when he came near Kotak Mahindra Bank, Dinnur Main Road, at that time, a Milk Canter bearing Reg. No.KA076827 came with high speed and in a rash and negligent manner and over took him and then dashed against Mr. Praveen who was riding Motor cycle bearing Reg. No.KA04HF4317 which was proceeding ahead him. Thereafter, the rider of the Motorcycle fell down and immediately he stopped his two wheeler and rushed to the spot and arranged with the help of public to shift the injured in an Ambulance to admit him to V.Care Hospital, R.T. Nagar, Bengaluru. It is pertinent to note here that in the cross examination, PW.3 admitted that he has not lodged complaint and he has not assisted the Police for the investigation and he has not accompanied the injured to the Hospital and he has not given any information either in the Hospital or in the Police SCCH 15 13 MVC No.7076/2017 Station about the accident. Further he deposed that the Petitioner himself requested him to give evidence before the Court.
19. It is very important to note here that the Petitioner has not produced Chargesheet, Wound Certificate and MLC Register Extract before this Court. But, Respondent No.2 through its witness i.e., RW.1 got marked the true copy of Chargesheet at Ex.R.3, true copy of MLC Register and Wound Certificate at Ex.R.4 and Ex.R.5. Upon going through the Ex.R.3 i.e., true copy of Chargesheet, it shows that after thorough investigation, the I.O., has submitted Chargesheet against the Petitioner as Accused No.1 for the offence punishable under Sec.279 of IPC. Further, the I.O., has also Chargesheeted the Owner of the Motorcycle bearing Reg. No.KA04HF4317 as Accused No.2 for handing over the vehicle to the Accused No.1 knowing fully well that his vehicle does not holds Insurance Policy at the time of SCCH 15 14 MVC No.7076/2017 accident. At this juncture, I would like to go through the Column No.17 of the Chargesheet which is as under:
"ದನನಕ 03.10.2017 ರದ ರತತ ಸಮರ 11.00 ಗಟಯ ಸಮಯದಲಲ ಠಣ ಸರಹದದ ನ ದಣಣ ರ ಮಖಖ ರಸಸ ಯಲಲ ಮಹಹನದತ ಬಖ ನಕ ಬಳ ಸಲಸ ನ ಪಳಖ ಕಡಯನದ ಆರ.ಟ. ನಗರದ ಕಡಗ ಹಹಗತಸ ದದ ಕಲ.12 ರಲಲ ನಮದಸರವ ಆರಹಪ1 ಮಹಟರ ಸಕಲ ನಬರ.ಕ04ಹಚಎ ಫ4317 ರ ಸವರ ಸದರ ವಹನವನನ ವಗವಗ ಸವರ ಮಡಕನಡ ಹಹದಗ ವಹನ ಸವರಯ ಮಲ ಸಸ ಯ ನಯತತ ಣ ಕಳದಕನಡ ಆಯತಪಪ ವಹನ ಸಮತ ರಸಸ ಯ ಮಲ ಬದದ ಗ, ಮಮಹಟರ ಸಕಲ ಜಖಗನಡದದ ಲಲ ದ ಆರಹಪ1 ಸವರನಗ ಸಹ ತಹವತ ಸಸ ರಪದ ಗಯಗಳಗರತಸ ವ.
ಅಪಘತದ ಸಮಯದಲಲ ಆರಹಪ ಮಹಟರ ಸಕಲ ನಬರ ಕ 04ಹಚಎ ಫ4317 ವಹನಕಕ ವಮ ಚಲಸ ಯಲಲ ಲಲ ದದದ ರ ಆರಹಪ2 ವಹನ ಮಲಹಕರ ಆರಹಪ1 ಸವರನಗ ವಹನವನನ ಸವರ ಮಡಲ ಕಟಟ ಅಪರಧವಸಗರತಸ ರ. ಆದದ ರನದ ಆರಹಪ1 ಮತಸ ಆರಹಪ2 ರವರಗಳ ವರದದ ಮಲಕ ನಡ ಕಲ ರಹತಖ ಮನಖ ಘನ ನಖ ಯಮ ಲಯಕಕ ದಹಷರಹಪಣ ಪಟಟ ಯಲಲ ಸಲಲ ಸರತಸ ದ".
20. So, the investigation of the I.O., shows that on the alleged date of accident, the Petitioner himself has ridden his Motorcycle with a high speed and in a rash and negligent manner and lost control over his vehicle and skid and fell on the Road and he had sustained injuries. Ex.R.4 i.e., MLC Register of the Bowring and Lady Curzon Hospital, Bengaluru, it shows that alleged history of RTA? Skid and SCCH 15 15 MVC No.7076/2017 Fall from two wheeler, proper history not known, at Dinnur Main Road, R.T. Nagar, around 11.00 p.m. when the patient was riding the vehicle. Ex.R.5 i.e., Wound Certificate of Petitioner which also shows that the alleged history of the accident as RTA and Skid and Fall from two wheeler, proper history not known by attender, at Dinnur Main Road. Ex.R.4 and Ex.R.5 are the primary documents when the Petitioner was admitted to the hospital which clearly shows that the alleged accident occurred due to Skid and Fall by the Petitioner himself.
21. The petitioner has relied on Ex.P.14 i.e., Certified copy of Judgment in CC No.9052/2019, which shows that the Petitioner being the accused No.1 and Owner of the offending vehicle being Accused No.2 had acquitted in the said CC No.9052/2019. It is pertinent to note here that the driver of the Milk Canter was shown as eye witness in the Charge sheet and he has been examined as PW.1 in the said SCCH 15 16 MVC No.7076/2017 Criminal case, who has deposed that, he has seen the Petitioner fell lying on the road and he shifted the injured person to the Bowring and Lady Curzon Hospital, Bengaluru. It is pertinent to note here that the alleged driver was shown as eye witness and one Syed Bilal S/o. Syed Ayob and Nayaz S/o. Mustaq Ali and one Rudresh G., S/o. Gangadarappa have been cited as eye witnesses in the Charge sheet. Further PW.3 who has been examined by the Petitioner in this case has not been cited as eye witness in the Chargesheet. Moreover, Ex.P.7 i.e., the Spot Mahazar shows that the spot was shown by the eye witness by name Syed Bilal stating that on the alleged date of accident, the rider of the Motorcycle bearing Reg. No.KA04HF4317 has ridden the same in a rash and negligent manner and lost control over his vehicle and fell on the road and had sustained injuries. So, it is crystal clear that the eye witness i.e., Syed Bilal who also cited in the Chargesheet as eye witness has shown the accident spot to the police and stated that the said accident SCCH 15 17 MVC No.7076/2017 has occurred by the rash and negligent riding of the rider of the Motorcycle i.e., by the Petitioner himself. This eye witness has not been examined by the Petitioner in this case and also the witness who has been examined by the Petitioner i.e., PW.3 stating that he was the eye witness who has not cited in the Chargesheet as eye witness. Therefore, the evidence of PW.3 is not believable and trustworthy. Moreover, PW.1 admitted in his crossexamination that in Ex.P.11 i.e., Case sheet also shows Patient is under the influence of alcohol. It is important to note here that the Petitioner has not produced Chargesheet, Wound Certificate and MLC Register Extract in this case though the said documents are material documents and what prevented him to produce the said documents before this court, if really the alleged accident would not happened by the Petitioner himself ?. All these circumstances of the case clearly pointed out that the alleged accident was occurred due to rash and negligent riding of the Motorcycle by the Petitioner himself and he lost control over his vehicle and SCCH 15 18 MVC No.7076/2017 Skid and fell on the road and thereby he had sustained injuries. Therefore, having regard to the facts and circumstances of this case and materials available on record, the Petitioner has failed to prove that the said accident has been occurred by the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Milk Canter bearing Reg. No.KA076827. Accordingly, I answer Point No.1 in the 'Negative'.
22. Point No.2: In view of detailed discussion in Point No.1, the Petitioner has failed to prove the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Milk Canter bearing Reg. No.KA 076827. Hence, the Petitioner is not entitled for any compensation. Accordingly, I answer Point No.2 "in the Negative".
23. Point No.3: In view of my findings on Point No.1 and 2, I proceed to pass the following:
SCCH 15 19 MVC No.7076/2017
ORDER
The Claim Petition filed by the Petitioner against the Respondents U/S 166 of M.V. Act is hereby dismissed with costs.
Draw Award accordingly.
(Dictated to the stenographer directly on the computer, print out taken by her, corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 17th day of September, 2024) (Smt. Kumari Sujatha.) XIII Addl. Small Causes Judge, ACJM,Court of Small Causes & Member, MACT15, Bengaluru.
Annexure Witnesses examined on behalf of the Petitioner :
P.W.1 : Sri. Praveen R., P.W.2 : Dr. S.A. Somashekar P.W.3 : Sri Chandrashekar Murthy T.V.,
Documents marked as Exhibits for the Petitioner :
Ex.P1 : FIR Ex.P1(a) : Complaint SCCH 15 20 MVC No.7076/2017 Ex.P2 : Discharge cards Ex.P3 : Doctor's Certificate Ex.P4 : Photos Ex.P4(a) : CD Ex.P5 : Aadhar card Ex.P6 : Medical Bills Ex.P7 : Spot Mahazar Ex.P8 : Spot sketch Ex.P9 : IMV Report Ex.P10 : OPD Card Ex.P11 : Case sheet Ex.P12 : Xrays Ex.P13 : Aadhar card Ex.P14 : Certified copy of Judgment in CC
No.9052/2019 on the file of MMTCIV Court Witnesses examined on behalf of the Respondents:
RW.1 : Sri Bikra Singh Rana Documents marked as Exhibits for the Respondents:
Ex.R.1 : Authorization Letter Ex.R.2 : True copy of Insurance Policy in respect of
Milk Canter bearing Reg. No.KA076827.
Ex.R.3 : True copy of Chargesheet
SCCH 15 21 MVC No.7076/2017
Ex.R.4 : True copy of MLC Register Extract
Ex.R.5 : Wound Certificate
( Smt. Kumari Sujatha.)
XIII Addl. Small Causes Judge,
ACJM,Court of Small Causes &
Member, MACT15, Bengaluru.