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 5, Cited by 0]

Bangalore District Court

Meka Lingam vs The General Manager on 29 April, 2022

KABC020135452018




 BEFORE THE CHIEF JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL
CAUSES, MEMBER PRL.MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS
          TRIBUNAL AT BENGALURU
                (S.C.C.H. - 1)

    DATED THIS THE 29th DAY OF APRIL 2022

PRESENT : Smt. PRABHAVATI M.HIREMATH,B.A., L.L.B.(Spl.)
           MEMBER, PRL. M.A.C.T.

M.V.C. No. 3127/2018 C/w. M.V.C.No.3128/2018,
  M.V.C. No.3129/2018, M.V.C. No.2165/2018,
  M.V.C. No.2166/2018, M.V.C. No.2167/2018,
 M.V.C. No.2168/2018 and M.V.C.No.2169/2018


PETITIONER:          Meka Lingam,
(in MVC 3127/2018)   S/o. Meka Narasaiah,
                     Aged about 43 years,
                     Ramakrishnanagar,
                     Madinaguda, Miyapur,
                     Hyderabad.

                     Now residing at
                     Hollyhock Apartment,
                     Kammasandra Road,
                     Electronic City,
                     Bangalore­560 100.

                     (By Sri . B.B.Patil , Advocate)
 SCCH-1           2     MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




PETITIONER       : 1. Meka Ruthwin,
(in MVC 3128/2018)    S/o. Meka Lingam,
                      Aged 11 years, Minor,
                      represented by father and
                       natural guardian
                       Meka Lingam,
                     S/o. Meka Narasaiah,
                     Ramakrishnanagar,
                     Madinaguda, Miyapur,
                     Hyderabad.

                       Now residing at
                       Hollyhock Apartment,
                       Kammasandra Road,
                       Electronic City,
                       Bangalore­560 100.

                       (By Sri . B.B.Patil , Advocate)

PETITIONER       : 1. Meka Rishikah,
(in MVC 3129/2018)    D/o. Meka Lingam,
                      Aged 8 years, Minor,
                      represented by father and
                       natural guardian
                       Meka Lingam,
                       S/o. Meka Narasaiah,
                       Ramakrishnanagar,
                       Madinaguda, Miyapur,
                       Hyderabad.

                       Now residing at
                       Hollyhock Apartment,
                       Kammasandra Road,
                       Electronic City,
                       Bangalore­560 100.

                       (By Sri . B.B.Patil , Advocate)
 SCCH-1            3      MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




PETITIONER       : 1. Usha Ravikeerthi,
(in MVC 2165/2018)    W/o. M.C.Ravikeerthi,
                      Aged about 34 years,
                      R/at 5th Main, 2nd Block,
                      Near PES College,
                      Banashankari I stage,
                      Bangalore ­560 050.

                        (By Sri . B.B.Patil , Advocate)



PETITIONER       : 1. Vinay Ramachandra Bhat,
(in MVC 2166/2018)    S/o. Ramachandra,
                      Aged about 23 years,
                      R/o. SLV P..G. Kundalahalli,
                      Brooke Field,
                      Bangalore.

                      P/A: Angodkoppa, Yekkamabi,
                           Uttara Kannada, Sirsi.

                        (By Sri . B.B.Patil , Advocate)

PETITIONER       : 1. Balasubramanya Rao M.,
(in MVC 2167/2018)    S/o. Raghupathi Rao M.,
                      Aged about 26 years,
                      No.112, 4th Main, 1st Cross,
                      BEML Layout, R.R.Nagar,
                      Bangalore.
                   Permanent address,
                      Maryada House,
                      Shibage,
                      Dakshina Kannada,
                      Karnataka.

                        (By Sri . B.B.Patil , Advocate)
 SCCH-1           4      MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




PETITIONER        : 1. Pradeep H.,
(in MVC 2168/2018      S/o. Babu Gowda,
                       Aged abut 28 years,
                       R/at Hosamane, Nada,
                       Dakshina Kannada.

                       Presently R/at
                       Oasis Apartment,
                       Kundalahalli.

                       (By Sri . B.B.Patil , Advocate)

PETITIONER        : 1. Yashwanthi M.,
(in MVC 2169/2018      D/o. Podiya Gowda,
                       Aged about 27 years,
                       R/at Udanehalli,
                       Shirali, Dakshina Kannada.

                     Presently R/at
                     C/o.MPS Limited,
                     HMG Ambassador,
                     No.137, Residency Road,
                     Bangalore ­560 025.

                       (By Sri . B.B.Patil , Advocate)

                     ­ V/s ­
Respondents:         1. The General Manager,
(Common in all the      K.S.R.T.C.,
   cases)               Double Road,
                        Shanthinagar,
                        Bangalore ­560 027.
                     (Owner of the KSRTC Airavat bus
                     bearing No.KA­01­F­8513)

                     (By Sri . M.S.Basavaraju,
                        Advocate)
 SCCH-1                 5         MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




                           2. The New India Assurance
                              Co.Ltd.,
                              Regional Office, No.9/2,
                              Mahalakshmi Chambers,
                              M.G.Road, Bangalore ­560 001.

                            (By Sri . Ravi S. Samprathi,
                              Advocate)

                             *******

                 COMMON JUDGMENT

     These eight petitions are filed under Section 166

of Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation for the

injuries sustained by the petitioners in all the petitions.

These eight petitions are arising out of the same

accident.   As   per       the    Order     dated     24.02.2020,

M.V.C.No.3128/2018 and              M.V.C.No.3129/2018           are

clubbed in M.V.C.No.3127/2018. As per the order

dated 18.09.2021 , M.V.C.No.2165­2169/2018 are

clubbed with M.V.C.No.3127/2018 and parties are

directed to give evidence in M.V.C.No.3127/2018.
 SCCH-1                   6       MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




        2. In all these petitions, petitioners have averred

similar facts regarding mode of occurrence of the

accident as follows:

    All the petitioners were travelling in KSRTC Airavat

bus bearing No.KA­01­F­8513 on 13.01.2018 from

Bengaluru towards Dharmasthala. At about 3.30 a.m.,

when their bus was proceeding near Agri College ,

Shanthigrama hobli, at that time driver of the bus

drove the vehicle in a rash or negligent manner and he

hit the road side divider and the bus got turtle and fell

in a ditch by the side of the road. Due to the said

accident all the petitioners who were the inmates of the

bus and other inmates of the bus have sustained

grievous injuries, apart from that 7 persons succumbed

to the injuries including driver and conductor of the

bus.

       3.   It   is   specific   case   of   the    petitioner    in

M.V.C.No.3127/2018 that after the accident he was
 SCCH-1                     7       MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




shifted to          N.D.R.K. Hospital, Hassan and taken

treatment      as     an       inpatient   from    13.01.2018       to

15.01.2018. Thereafter he was admitted to Narayana

Hrudayalaya, Hosur Road, Bengaluru and he has taken

follow    up    treatment.        He   has     spent    more     than

Rs.1,50,000/­ towards medical expenses,                   conveyance

and incidental charges.

      4. Prior to the accident he was hale and healthy,

he was earning Rs.1,60,000/­p.m. in Apotex Research

Private Limited, Hosur Road, Bengaluru and he was

contributing the entire income to the welfare of the

family.

      5. Due to the rash or negligent act of driving on

the   part     of    the       KSRTC   bus    accident     occurred.

Therefore,     respondent          No.1    being    the    owner         ,

respondent No.2 being the insurer are jointly and

severally liable to pay the compensation and prayed to
 SCCH-1                    8       MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




allow the petition by granting Rs.15,00,000/­ as

compensation,

       6. In M.V.C.No.3128/2018 petitioner is none

other     than      the        son    of    the     petitioner     in

M.V.C.No.3127/2018 and he is a minor, therefore the

said    petition    is    filed   through     his    father/natural

guardian i.e., petitioner in M.V.C.No.3127/2018. It is

the case of the petitioner that due to the accident he

has sustained injuries and took treatment as an

inpatient     in N.D.R.K. Hospital, Hassan and taken

treatment     as     an       inpatient    from     13.01.2018     to

15.01.2018.        For better treatment he was shifted to

Narayana Hrudayalaya, Hosur Road, Bengaluru and he

has taken treatment as an inpatient from 16.01.2018

to 21.01.2018 and undergone operation for facial

injuries and       also skin grafting done seven times. As

per the advise of the doctor he has taken follow up

treatment. He has spent more than Rs.3,00,000/­

towards medical expenses.
 SCCH-1               9      MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




      7. Prior to the accident he was hale and healthy,

he was studying in 7th standard Delhi Public School,

East Bengaluru and on account of accidental injuries

petitioner cannot attend to school for some days. Due

to the injuries sustained in the accident he is suffering

from tears from the eyes which effects his studies. He

gets frequent headache. He is a brilliant student ..now

he cannot     attend his sports and extracurricular

activities and compensation of Rs.25 lakhs is claimed.

The    respondent No.1 being the owner , respondent

No.2 being the insurer are jointly and severally liable to

pay the compensation and prayed to allow the petition

by granting Rs.25,00,000/­ as compensation.

      8. Once again M.V.C.No.3129/2018 is filed by a

minor daughter     of petitioner in M.V.C.No.3127/2018

therefore   the   said   petition   is      filed   through   her

father/natural      guardian        i.e.,       petitioner     in

M.V.C.No.3127/2018. It is the case of the petitioner

that due to the accident she has sustained injuries and
 SCCH-1                  10    MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




took treatment as an inpatient         in N.D.R.K. Hospital,

Hassan and taken treatment as an inpatient from

13.01.2018 to 16.01.2018. For better treatment he was

shifted    to   Narayana     Hrudayalaya,      Hosur      Road,

Bengaluru and she has taken treatment as out patient.

And    has      spent    Rs.50,000/­    towars     medical      ,

conveyance      ,   nourishment     and    other    incidental

charges.

      9. Prior to the accident she was hale and healthy,

she was studying in 4th standard at Delhi Public

School, East Bengaluru/Sri Chaithnya International

School, Electronic City, Bengaluru. On account of

accidental injuries petitioner did not attend to school

for some days. Due to the accidental injuries petitioner

is suffering from mental agony. She is a brilliant

student and she is not attending to her sports and

curricular activities and compensation of Rs.5 lakhs is

claimed. The        respondent No.1 being the owner ,

respondent No.2 being the insurer are jointly and
 SCCH-1                  11        MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




severally liable to pay the compensation and prayed to

allow    the    petition     by   granting    Rs.5,00,000/­       as

compensation.


    10.    It    is   specific    case   of   the    petitioner   in

M.V.C.No.2165/2018 Usha Ravikeerthi that, after the

accident she was shifted to N.D.R.K. Hospital, Hassan

and taken treatment as an inpatient . On same day she

was undergone operation and for better treatment she

was shifted to Sanjeevini Hospital, Davanagere and she

is taking follow up treatment. She has spent more than

Rs.1,00,000/­ towards medical expenses , conveyance,

nourishment and other incidental charges.

    11. Prior to the accident she was hale and healthy,

she was         earning Rs.40,000/­p.m.             by conducting

tuitions to 6 to 10th students . Due to the rash or

negligent act of driving on the part of the KSRTC bus

accident occurred.         Therefore, respondent No.1 being

the owner , respondent No.2 being the insurer are
 SCCH-1                12       MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation and

prayed to allow the petition by granting Rs.18,00,000/­

as compensation,

    12.   It   is   specific   case   of   the   petitioner    in

M.V.C.No.2166/2018 Vinay Ramachandra Bhat that

after the accident he sustained grievous injuries and he

was shifted to Chanamarajendra Government Hospital,

Hassan and admitted as an inpatient . Thereafter, he

was shifted to Sirsi           private Hospital for better

treatment . He has been taking follow up treatment as

per the advise of the doctor and spent more than

Rs.50,000/­ towards medical expenses,              conveyance

and incidental charges.

    13. Prior to the accident he was hale and healthy,

he was working in KPIT Technologies, white Field,

Bengaluru and earning Rs.27,000/­p.m. Due to the

rash or negligent act of driving on the part of the

KSRTC bus accident occurred. Therefore, respondent
 SCCH-1                    13       MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




No.1 being the owner , respondent No.2 being the

insurer are jointly and severally liable to pay the

compensation and prayed to allow the petition by

granting Rs.3,00,000/­ as compensation.

       14.    It   is   specific   case   of    the     petitioner   in

M.V.C.No.2167/2018 Balasubramana Rao M. that

after the accident he was shifted to N.D.R.K. Hospital,

Hassan and taken treatment as an inpatient and on the

same day petitioner undergone operation. Thereafter for

better       treatment     the     petitioner     was     shifted    to

Belthangadi , Dakshina Kannada. He has spent more

than         Rs.60,000/­       towards         medical      expenses,

conveyance and incidental charges. He has been taken

follow up treatment in private hospital.

       15. Prior to the accident he was hale and healthy,

he was earning Rs.48,000/­p.m. by working in Aravind

Fashions Pvt.Ltd., M.G.Road, Bengaluru. Due to the

rash or negligent act of driving on the part of the
 SCCH-1                    14       MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




KSRTC bus accident occurred. Therefore, respondent

No.1 being the owner , respondent No.2 being the

insurer are jointly and severally liable to pay the

compensation and prayed to allow the petition by

granting Rs.5,00,000/­ as compensation.

    16.     It    is    specific   case   of   the   petitioner    in

M.V.C.No.2168/2018 that after the accident he was

shifted to Government Hospital, Hassan and after

taking first aid treatment , for better treatment he was

shifted to Indiana Hospital and Heart Institute Ltd.,

and then to Tejaswinin Hospital, Mangalore.                 He has

spent     more         than    Rs.50,000/­     towards      medical

expenses,        conveyance and incidental charges.

    17. Prior to the accident he was hale and healthy,

he was earning Rs.25,000/­p.m. by doing Electrician

work . Due to the rash or negligent act of driving on the

part of the KSRTC bus accident occurred.                 Therefore,

respondent No.1 being the owner , respondent No.2
 SCCH-1                15       MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




being the insurer are jointly and severally liable to pay

the compensation and prayed to allow the petition by

granting Rs.3,00,000/­ as compensation.

    18.   It   is   specific   case   of   the   petitioner    in

M.V.C.No.2169/2018 Yashwanthi M. that after the

accident she was shifted to Government Hospital,

Hassan, after taking first aid , for better treatment she

was shifted to Adarsha Hospital Puttur, wherein she

took treatment as an inpatient from 13.01.2018 to

21.03.2018. She was undergone operation i.e., skin

grafting on the face , she has spent more than

Rs.80,000/­ towards medical expenses,              conveyance

and incidental charges.

    19. Prior to the accident she was hale and healthy,

she was    earning Rs.15,000/­p.m. by working in a

private company , Residency road, Bengaluru. Due to

the rash or negligent act of driving on the part of the

KSRTC bus accident occurred. Therefore, respondent
 SCCH-1               16         MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




No.1 being the owner , respondent No.2 being the

insurer are jointly and severally liable to pay the

compensation and prayed to allow the petition by

granting Rs.5,00,000/­ as compensation,

      20. After service of notice in all the 8 petitions,

respondents No.1 and 2 have appeared through their

respective Advocates and filed written statements

averring similar facts in all cases.

      21. The brief facts of the written statement filed

by respondent No.1, KSRTC is as under:

      The    petitions    are     not     maintainable.       The

averments in all petitions with reference to mode of

occurrence of accident and negligent act on the part of

driver of the KSRTC Airvat volvo bus are denied by

stating that petitioner be put to strict proof of the same.

      22. It is specifically contended that the driver of

the bus was driving the bus by observing all traffic

rules and regulations . The bus was proceeding on
 SCCH-1              17      MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




Bengaluru­Mysuru road at H.Aladhahalli in front of

Agriculture college , a lorry which was coming from the

opposite direction suddenly took U turn and entered

the path of the bus observing the same, the driver of

the bus sensing some mishap took the bus to the

extreme left side of the road and in that process it came

in contact with the road side culvert and resulted in the

alleged accident. The driver of the unknown lorry was

solely responsible for the accident . All the petitioners

in 8 petitions with a sole intention to make a wrongful

gain from the respondent No.1 have filed these petitions

based on the criminal records. There is collusion

between the petitioners and police , thereby false case

is registered against the driver of the bus.

      23. The entire averments in the petition with

reference to name, age , occupation, they are the

passengers of the bus and sustained injuries, they have

taken treatment in different hospitals are all denied in
 SCCH-1                  18    MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




toto by stating that they are put to strict proof of the

same.

        24. It is specifically contended that the volvo bus

was insured with the second respondent covering the

risk of the first respondent at a material point of time.

Therefore, respondent No.2 is indemnified the liability

of the first respondent.

        25. It is specifically contended that respondent

No.1 KSRTC has paid a sum of Rs.28,428/­ to the

petitioner in M.V.C.No.3127/2018 , Rs.4,16,428/0

twards       the    medical    bill    of     petitioner      in

M.V.C.No.3128/2018, Rs.21,280/­ with reference to

petitioner    in   M.V.C.No.3129/2018,        an   amount     of

Rs.23,820/­ to the petitioner in M.V.C.No.2167/2018,

an   amount        of    Rs.10,588/­     to    petitioner     in

M.V.C.No.2168/2018, Rs.5000/­ to the petitioner in

M.V.C.No.2166/2018, Rs.1,79,130/­ to the petitioner

in M.V.C.No.2165/2018, Rs.29,767/­ to the petitioner
 SCCH-1               19         MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




in M.V.C.No.2169/2018 towards the medical bills

incurred    by   them     for    their   treatment.      Thereby

respondent No.1 is entitled for           respective amounts

paid to the above referred 8 petitions as it was paid as

exgratia amount. They sought for issuance of direction

against the second respondent to pay the above said

amount already paid by the respondent No.1 to the

respective petitioners and prayed to dismiss the

petition.

      26. The brief facts of the written statement filed

by second respondent in all petitions are as under:

      The petitions are not maintainable. The police

have not complied the mandatory requirement of

Section 158(6) of M.V.Act. The driver of the bus was not

holding valid and effective driving licence at the time of

accident. The first respondent had handed over the

possession of the vehicle to the said driver thereby

contravened      the provisions of M.V.Act. There is no
 SCCH-1               20        MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




negligence on the part of the driver of the bus. The

entire averments in all petitions with reference to mode

of occurrence of accident, age, occupation , income ,

injuries sustained by the petitioners and medical

expenses incurred by them as averred in each petition

is denied by them and prayed to dismiss the petitions.

      27. From the above said pleadings of the parties,

my predecessor in Office has framed the                following

issues in all the petitions.

1. Whether the Petitioner proves that he sustained
   grievous injuries in a Motor Vehicle Accident that
   occurred on 13.01.2018 at about 3.30 a.m. near
   Agri College NH­75, B.M.Road, Shanthigrama Hobli,
   Hassan Taluk and District, within the jurisdiction
   of Shanthigrama police station on account of rash
   and negligent driving of the KSRTC bus bearing
   registration No.KA­01­F­8513 by its driver?


2. Whether the petitioner is entitled for compensation?
   If so, how much and from whom?

3. What order?
 SCCH-1             21      MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




      28. In support of the petitioner's case, petitioner

in M.V.C.No.3127/2018 himself examined as PW­1

with reference to the that case and by representing his

minor son    and daughter who are the petitioners in

M.V.C.No.3128/2018, M.V.C.No.3129/2018. Other 4

petitioners are examined as PW­2 to 5 and got marked

in all 41 documents as Ex.P.1 to P.41. In support of

the respondent's case on behalf of respondent No.1 ,

Traffic Inspector Prathima N. is examined as RW­1 and

got marked in all 22 documents as Ex.R.1. R.22. The

respondent No.2 has not adduced any oral evidence.

      29. Heard arguments on both sides.


      30.   For the reasons stated in the subsequent

paras, I answer the above Issues are as follows:­

   1) Issue No.1 in all the cases ... In Affirmative,
   2) Issue No.2 in all the cases    ... accordingly
   3) Issue No.3 in all the cases...As per final order
                                  for the following:­
 SCCH-1             22      MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




                        REASONS
     31. Issue No.1 (in all the cases): It is the case of

the petitioners in all petitions that    only due to the

rash or negligent act of driving on the part of driver of

KSRTC bus accident occurred. To substantiate the

same, petitioners have relied on the oral evidence of

PW­1 to 5 and police records.


     32. PW­1 to 5 in the chief examination affidavit

has averred the similar facts as stated in the petition.

The police records relied on by the petitioners are

Ex.P.1 FIR with complaint, Ex.P.2 spot mahazar,

Ex.P.3 seizure mahazar, Ex.P.4 spot skrtch, Ex.P.5

IMV report, Ex.P.6 charge sheet.


     33. From going through the above said records ,

it is clear that on 13.01.2018 at about 3.30 a.m.

accident occurred. On receipt of intimation regarding

occurrence of the accident Police Officer has visited the

hospital and recorded the statement of Sridhara
 SCCH-1              23      MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




hegade, S/o.Ganapathy Venkatarama Hegade , who

was taking treatment in the Government Hospital,

Hassan about the accident .


     34. On the basis of his statement case was

registered for the offences punishable under Section

279,337 and 304(A) of IPC against the KSRTC bus

driver. On the same day Investigation Officer has

conducted the spot panchanama as per Ex.P.2 and

seizure panchanama       as per Ex.P.3. At the time of

conducting the panchanama rough sketch was drawn

by the Investigating Officer.

     35. In Ex.P.2 spot panchanama description of the

scene of offence is mentioned as it is on NH­75 one

way road of Bengaluru­Mysore road exact spot is on

bridge under which there is a ditch . The width of the

ditch is 36 x 40 feet and 12 feet depth. The bus was

lifted from the ditch by using crane . At the time of

conducting spot panhcanama, Investigating Officer
 SCCH-1                 24    MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




noticed that there was a safety wall of aluminum grill

to an extent of 124 feet. Out of those safety aluminum

grills, on 11 grills    bus ran over and aluminum grill

was damaged and bent towards the ground. At the

spot Bengaluru ­Mysore road is from East to West

width of the road is 27 feet. Towards south there is 5

feet footpath. To the ditch they have built bridge and to

the bridge there is safety wall on either side and the

bus dashed tot he safety wall and fell on to the ditch.

From Ex.P.4 spot sketch it is clear that even though

there is aluminum grill as safety wall, the bus dashed

to the safety wall and fell in the ditch.


     36. Even though respondents have taken a

contention that prior to the accident lorry came from

opposite direction, therefore, bus driver took the bus

extreme left side of the road and in that process

accident occurred. To substantiate the same there was

no positive evidence on record. On the contrary from
 SCCH-1             25      MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




the above said records, it is clear that it is a highway

and accident occurred in one way road kept for the

movement of the vehicles from Bengaluru after median

there is separate provision for the     vehicles to move

from opposite direction. Therefore, from the evidence

of PW­1 to 5 and above referred police records

petitioner proved that only due to the negligent act of

the driver of the KSRTC bus accident occurred.


     37. Considering the same on completion of

investigation, Investigating Officer has filed abated

charge sheet against the driver of the bus. In the said

accident driver and conductor of the bus and 5

inmates of the bus succumbed to the injuries.


     38. At the time of argument learned Advocate for

respondent No.1 has produced the judgments passed

by SCCH­13 and SCCH­9. Those judgments are with

reference to petitions   filed by other inmates of the

bus. As there is no intervention of other vehicle the
 SCCH-1                 26      MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




facts that mode of occurrence of the accident itself is

sufficient to prove the rash or negligent act of driving

on the part of the KSRTC bus driver. In                    those

petitions, SCCH­9 and SCCH­13,             Presiding Officers

have given the similar findings with reference to the

negligent act of driving on the part of the driver of the

KSRTC bus .

     39. To prove that in the said accident they have

sustained injuries they have relied on the wound

certificate, discharge summary and medical records as

per Ex.P.7, P.10,P.17, P.20, P.25, P.30, P.35 and P.37

wound    certificate    of   all   petitioners.   From     these

documents, it is clear that petitioners have sustained

injuries in the said accident. Hence, Issue NO.1 in all

petitions are answered in the Affirmative.


     40.Issue No.2: (3127/2018): The petitioner in

M.V.C.No.3127/2018, Meka Lingam                   has claimed

compensation of Rs.15,00,000/­ on various heads.
 SCCH-1             27      MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




     41. In the decision reported in (2011) 1 SCC 343

( Raj Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar and another) Division

Bench of the Hon'ble Apex Court has laid down on

what grounds compensation is required to be awarded

in personal injury case. In para 6 of the said judgment

their Lordships has demarcated the heads in which

compensation is required to be considered are reads as

under:

       6. The heads under which compensation is
   awarded in personal injury cases are the following:

        Pecuniary damages(Special damages)
        (i)Expenses      relating    to     treatment,
   hospitalization,     medicines,      transportation,
   nourishing food, and miscellaneous expenditure.

         (ii) Loss of earnings (and other gains) which the
   injured would have made had he not been injured,
   comprising:
              (a) Loss of earning during the period of
                  treatment
              (b) Loss of future earnings on account of
                  permanent disability.
         (iii) future medical expenses

         Non­pecuniary damages(General damages)

        (iv) Damages for pain, suffering and trauma as
   a consequence of the injuries.
 SCCH-1               28      MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




        (v) Loss of amenities (and/or loss of prospects
   of marriage)
        (vi) Loss of expectation of life(shortening of
   normal longevity)


     42. From going through the above said decision, it

is clear that under the pecuniary damages expenses

relating to the treatment , hospitalisation, medicines,

transportation,   nourishing     food   and    miscellaneous

expenditure are required to be considered with. In the

second head loss of earning and other gains of the

injured person is required to be considered. In the

background of principle laid down by their Lordships in

the above said decision we can consider what amount

the petitioner is entitled for compensation.


     43. To prove what are the injuries sustained by

the petitioner in the accident, he relied on his oral

evidence and Ex.P.7. Ex.P.7 is the wound certificate of

Meka Lingam, i.e., the petitioner. As per Ex.P.7 wound

certificate   petitioner   has   sustained     4   injuries    ,
 SCCH-1               29      MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




three (3) tenderness and one abrasion. Injury No.2 and

4 are described as simple in nature , injuries No.1 and

3 are described as grievous in nature. Ex.R.10,11,12

are the documents produced by KSRTC for having paid

the amount to the hospital authority on behalf of

petitioner.   From   Ex.R.11    ,   it   is   clear   that   on

16.01.2018 petitioner was discharged from ND.R.K

hospital and he was admitted on 13.01.2018 for a

period of 4 days. He had taken treatment and the

medical bills was paid by the KSRTC including

ambulance charges. During the course of cross­

examination of PW­1, he has admittd that KSRTC has

spent Rs.38,428/­ towards medical expenses and

incidental charges which is already spent on behalf of

the petitioner, same is required to be included in the

compensation amount.


     44. As per Ex.P.7, wound certificate petitioner

has sustained fracture of right 5 th rib, left 4th to 9th rib
 SCCH-1             30      MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




and fracture of right scapula. Considering the nature

of the injury sustained by the petitioner in the accident

compensation of Rs.40,000/­ is awarded to the

petitioner towards pain and sufferings.


     45. As already stated above, as per Ex.R.11,

petitioner has taken treatment as inpatient for 4 days.

Therefore Rs.4,000/­ is awarded to the petitioner

towards food, nourishment, attendant charges.


     46. Petitioner has spent amount for transport

even after discharge. He has            taken follow up

treatment. Therefore, Rs.2,000/­ is awarded to the

petitioner towards transport charges.


     47. It is the case of the petitioner that he has lost

3 months salary as he is unable to work . Except his

oral evidence, nothing is there on record. Considering

the nature of the injury sustained by the petitioner, it

might not be possible for him to work for a minimum
 SCCH-1              31      MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




period of 2 months. Even though petitioner has

claimed that he was working in Apotex Research

Private Ltd., and earning Rs.1,60,000/p.m. , he has

not produced any documentary evidence or he has not

adduced the evidence of his employer with reference to

his income. Therefore, considering the year of accident

2016, notional income is       taken at Rs.12,000/p.m.

Considering the nature of the injuries , it might not be

possible for the petitioner to discharge his work for a

minimum period of 2 months. Therefore, petitioner is

awarded Rs.24,000/­ towards loss of income during

the laid up period and rest period.


      48. The details of compensation, to which the

petitioner is entitled to is as under:­

Sl.   Head of Compensation                         Amount
No.
1.    Pain and Sufferings             Rs.                   40,000­00

2.    Medical Expenses                Rs.                   38,428­00
 SCCH-1                 32      MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




3.    Food and nourishment, Rs.                                  4,000­00
      attendant charges

4.    Transportation charges             Rs.                     2,000­00

5.    Loss of income during laid Rs.                           24,000­00
      up period
                   Total                 Rs.                 1,08,428­00

     Compensation amount to              Rs.                  70,000­00
             petitioner
  Medical bill amount to KSRTC           Rs.                   38,428.00



      49.    The    total    compensation      determined      in

M.V.C.No.3127/2018 is Rs.1,08,428/­ which carries

interest at 6%p.a. from the date of the petition till

realization. . Out of it already Rs.38,428/­ has been

paid by the KSRTC. The said amount is required to be

paid to the respondent No.1 KSRTC with interest at

6%p.a. from the date of the petition till realization and

petitioner    is    entitled    for   balance     amount       of

Rs.70,000/­with interest at 6%p.a. from the date of the

petition till realization.
 SCCH-1              33     MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




     50. Issue No.2: (3128/2018): The petitioner in

M.V.C.No.3128/2018, Meka Ruthwin, is a minor and

his father PW­1 represented him and           has claimed

compensation of Rs.25,00,000/­ on various heads.


     51.     In view of   the above     discussions      and

principles laid down by their Lordships in        (2011) 1

SCC 343 ( Raj Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar and another)

referred      in    answering       Issue       No.2       of

M.V.C.No.3127/2018, we are required to calculate the

compensation amount entitled by the petitioner in this

case also.


     52. To prove what are the injuries sustained by

the petitioner in the accident, PW­1 relied on Ex.P.10

wound certificate, Ex.P.11 discharge summary of

N.D.R.K. hospital , Ex.P.12 , (6) discharge summaries

of Narayana Netralaya, Bengaluru. Ex.P.13 is 3 EMR

summaries of Narayana Netralaya, Bengaluru, Ex.P.14
 SCCH-1                 34        MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




out patient case sheet, Ex.P.15, 20 medical bills for

Rs.2,58,241/­ and Ex.P.16 prescriptions(6).


     53. From the discharge summaries it is clear that

at N.D.R.K.    hospital      as per Ex.P.11 petitioner has

taken treatment as an inpatient from 13.01.2018 to

16.01.2018. Thereafter he has taken treatment in

Naryana Netralaya as inpatient from 16.01.2018 to

21.01.2018. Again he was readmitted on 29.01.2018

­and discharged on           08.02.2018. As per discharge

summary       issued        on    18.05.2018,        01.06.2018,

15.06.2018, 02.10.2018, it is clear                 that on      all

respective    dates    petitioner     underwent      surgery     in

Narayana Netralaya and he was discharged on the

same date. From these discharge summaries it is clear

that total 24 days petitioner has taken treatment as

inpatient    during 10 months period from January to

October 2018. For this long treatment, the injury
 SCCH-1               35     MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




caused to the petitioner in the said accident is the

reason.


      54. As per wound certificate, Ex.P.10 petitioner

has sustained 5 injuries. There is fracture of 8 th and 10

ribs. Right eye corneal tear is a superficial scratch on

the      clear, protective "window" at the front of eye

(cornea). From Ex.P.11 case sheet we can find the

positive photographs of the injured portion of the eye.

Considering the nature of the injury sustained by the

petitioner , boy aged 11 years and long sufferings for a

period of 10 months ,compensation of Rs.1,00,000/­

is awarded to the petitioner towards              pain    and

sufferings.


      55. From Ex.P.11 and P.12 , it is clear that on

different time gaps petitioner has taken treatment as

inpatient in the hospital with reference to the injury to

eye. Totally he took treatment for a period of 24 days

as inpatient. Therefore Rs.24,000/­ is awarded to the
 SCCH-1                36         MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




petitioner towards food,           nourishment, attendant

charges.


        56.   Petitioner   has     taken    treatment      as   an

inpatient on 7 occasions, thereafter, he has taken

treatment as out patient. Therefore, Rs.10,000/­ is

awarded to the petitioner towards transport charges.


        57. From the positive photographs attached to

the discharge summary, it is clear that the face of the

petitioner has been disfigured. There are permanent

marks on the face. Considering the age of the

petitioner and surgery underwent by the petitioner ,

still face of the minor petitioner appears to be

disfigured , therefore, compensation of Rs.1,00,000/­

is awarded to the petitioner for disfiguration of the

face.


        58. From going through Ex.P.12,                 discharge

summary, it is clear that in the first discharge
 SCCH-1             37        MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




summary at the time of discharge doctors advised him

to review   in paediatric surgery OPD , to review in

Narayana Nethralaya after two weeks. Similarly at

Sl.No.2 of discharge summary course in the hospital is

mentioned as petitioner underwent reexploration and

debridement local flap on 30.01.2018, full thickness

skin grafting on 02.02.2018, suture removal under

general anaesthesia .


      59. At Sl.No.3 of Ex.P.12, discharge summary, it

is   mentioned   that   in   case    of   emergency      when

increasing pain, increasing redness, worsening or loss

of vision, pus discharge from the eye to contact the

doctor. Similar things is mentioned in discharge

summary at Sl.No.4,5, 6 of Ex.P.12. From these , it is

clear that even after discharge as per Sl.No.6               of

Ex.P.12 in the month of October 2018            there is risk

factors involved with reference to increase of eye pain,

redness, worsening or loss of vision, pus discharge
 SCCH-1               38      MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




from the eyes.      Considering the same, petitioner is

required to take further treatment whenever, such

occasion arise. Considering the age of the petitioner ,

compensation of Rs.1,00,000/­ is awarded to the

petitioner towards future Medical expenses.


     60. In view of this eye injury petitioners study has

been effected. From the photographs it is clear that for

long period during treatment, it was not possible for

him to use that eye. Considering these facts an

amount of Rs.1,00,000/­ is awarded to the petitioner

towards loss of amenities.


     61. It is the case of the PW­1 that huge amount

has been spent towards the treatment of the minor

petitioner.   To substantiate the same Ex.P.15 , 20

medical bills have been produced. On the contrary

KSRTC has claimed that it has paid the medical

expenses.     For   that   respondent     No.1     relied   on

Ex.R.13,14 and 15. From going through Ex.P.15, 20
 SCCH-1             39      MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




medical bills for Rs.2,58,241/­. Eventhough Ex.P.15,

20 series of bills are original but from Ex.R.13,14 and

15 , it is clear that under those medical bills KSRTC

has paid Rs.4,79,041/­. Amount mentioned in Ex.P.15

series of bills is covered in Ex.R.13,14 and 15. Sl.No.1

of Ex.P.15 is the final bill issued by Narayana

Hrudayalaya. This bill is for Rs.2,18,790/­.


     62. Under Ex.R.16 , the K.S.R.T.C. has paid the

said amount. Therefore, there is no question of

payment of the bill amount in Sl.No.1 of Ex.P.15 to

PW­1. So also Sl.No.13,14,8,19,20 of Ex.P.15 are

covered in Ex.R.18, bills produced by the respondent.

Thereby it is proved that Ex.P.15 series of bills are

covered in the amount paid by K.S.R.T.C. Therefore,

petitioner is not entitled for any amount under the

head of medical expenses. But same is required to be

included in calculating total compensation. Therefore,

the amount paid by the KSRTC directly to the hospital
 SCCH-1                40    MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




including Rs.5000/­ paid to PW­1. The amount of

Rs.4,79,041/­    is    awarded    towards     the    medical

expenses is required to be paid to KSRTC. Therefore,

total compensation determined is Rs.9,13,041/­ with

interest at 6%p.a. from the date of the petition till

realization. Out of it, Rs.4,79,041/­ is required to be

paid to the KSRTC with interest at 6%p.a. from the

date of the petition till realization and petitioner is

entitled to the balance amount of Rs.4,34,000/­ with

interest at 6%p.a. from the date of the petition till

realization.


     63. As except transport charges, PW­1 has not

spent any amount for medical expenses of the

petitioner , therefore, entire amount is ordered to be

kept in the name of the minor petitioner in any of the

nationalized bank till he attains majority.


     64. The details of compensation, to which the

petitioner is entitled to is as under:­
 SCCH-1                 41     MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




Sl.    Head of Compensation                          Amount
No.
1.     Pain and Sufferings              Rs.                 1,00,000­00

2.     Medical Expenses                 Rs.                 4,79,041­00

3.     Food and nourishment, Rs.                              24,000­00
       attendant charges

4.     Transportation charges           Rs.                   10,000­00

5.     Disfiguration                    Rs.                 1,00,000­00

6.     Future Medical bills             Rs.                 1,00,000­00

7.     Loss of amenities                Rs.                 1,00,000­00

                  Total                 Rs.                 9,13,041­00

      Compensation amount to            Rs.                4,34,000­00
            petitioner
 Medical bill amount to KSRTC           Rs.                4,79,041­00



      65.   The    total    compensation      determined      in

M.V.C.No.3128/2018 is Rs.9,13,041/­ with interest at

6%p.a. from the date of the petition till realization.

Out of it already Rs.4,79,041/­ has been paid by the

K.S.R.T.C. Therefore, Rs.4,79,041/­ with interest at
 SCCH-1               42          MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




6%p.a. from the date of the petition till realizationis

required to be paid to the respondent No.1 K.S.R.T.C.

and petitioner is entitled for balance amount of

Rs.4,34,000/­with interest at 6%p.a. from the date of

the petition till realization.


     66. Issue No.2 in M.V.C.No.3129/2018: The

petitioner in M.V.C.No.3129/2018, Meka Rasika is a

minor and her father PW­1 represented her and has

claimed compensation of Rs.5,00,000/­ on various

heads.


     67.     In view of     the above         discussions      and

principles laid down by their Lordships in              (2011) 1

SCC 343 ( Raj Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar and another)

referred      in     answering            Issue       No.2       of

M.V.C.No.3127/2018, we are required to calculate the

compensation amount entitled by the petitioner in this

case also.
 SCCH-1             43      MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




     68. To prove what are the injuries sustained by

the petitioner in the accident, PW­1 relied on Ex.P.17

wound certificate, Ex.P.18 discharge summary. As per

Ex.P.17 wound certificate she has sustained only one

simple injury. From Ex.R.20 and 21 produced by the

K.S.R.T.C. , it is clear that the present petitioner has

taken treatment as inpatient from 13.01.2018 to

16.01.2018. Eventhough in the wound certificate it is

mentioned as simple injury and the KSRTC has paid

Rs.21,280/­ medical expenses i.e., Rs.5000/­ to PW­1

and Rs.16,280/­ to the NDRK hospital. An amount of

Rs.21,280/­ is awarded towards medical expenses and

the same is required to be paid to the KSRTC.


     69. Considering the fact that minor petitioner has

taken treatment as inpatient for a period of 4 days,

excluding   amount      spent   by   KSRTC,       a   global

compensation    of Rs.25,000/­ is awarded to the

petitioner including food, nourishment and attendant
 SCCH-1                44       MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




charges      of Rs.4,000/­ and transport charges of

Rs.2,000/­. Therefore, total compensation amount of

Rs.46,280/­ is the determined compensation.


      70.    The   total     compensation      determined      in

M.V.C.No.3129/2018 is Rs.46,280/­ with interest at

6%p.a. from the date of the petition till realization. Out

of it already Rs.21,280/­ has been paid by the KSRTC.

The said amount is required to be paid to the

respondent No.1 K.S.R.T.C.            with interest at 6%p.a.

from the date of the petition till realization and

petitioner    is   entitled     for    balance    amount       of

Rs.25,000/­with interest at 6%p.a. from the date of the

petition till realization.


      71. The petitioner is a minor said amount along

with interest is required to be kept in F.D. till she

attains majority as medical expenses were not spent by

next friend PW­1.
 SCCH-1                45     MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




      72. Issue No.2 in M.V.CNo.2165/2018: The

petitioner in M.V.C.No.2165/2018, Usha Ravi Keerthi

has   claimed      compensation    of    Rs.18,00,000/­      on

various heads.


      73.    In view of     the above      discussions      and

principles laid down by their Lordships in          (2011) 1

SCC 343 ( Raj Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar and another)

referred      in      answering         Issue     No.2       of

M.V.C.No.3127/2018, we are required to calculate the

compensation amount entitled by the petitioner in this

case also.


      74. To prove what are the injuries sustained by

the petitioner in the accident, she relied on Ex.P.19

discharge     summary,      Ex.P.18      wound     certificate.

Ex.P.21 CECT chest report . As per Ex.P.19 discharge

summary      petitioner    has   taken    treatment    as   an

inpatient from 13.01.2018 to 11.02.2018 for a period

of 30 dyas. As per Ex.P.20 wound certificate petitioner
 SCCH-1               46     MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




has sustained 3 injuries. 1) lacerated wound , 2)

tenderness . Injury No.1 is described as simple in

nature and injury No.2 is described as grievous in

nature.


     75. As per discharge summary and Ex.P.21

report petitioner has sustained fracture of left 11 th rib,

2 point fracture of left 9 th and 10th ribs and 3 point

fracture of 4th to 8th ribs­S/o flial cheat, displaced

fracture of 5th and 6th rib causing laceration with

contusion of left upper lobe, contusions also seen in

lower lobe, mild hemopneumothorax seen, lacerations

seen in upper pole of spleen reaching upto the hilum

wit no major devascularisation with mild perisplenic

fluid, small left perinephric hematoma measuring 20x6

mm around upper pole s/o grade 1 injury, right lung

appear normal , mediastinal structures appear normal.

No e/o mediastinal hematoma/pneumomediastinum.

Considering    the   fact   that   petitioner   has     taken
 SCCH-1             47       MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




treatment as inpatient the rib fracture as resulted in

damage to the spleen which seen in the upper portion

of spleen . Considering the said fact compensation of

Rs.70,000/­ is awarded to the petitioner towards pain

and sufferings.


     76. As per Ex.P.19 discharge summary petitioner

has taken treatment as an inpatient from 13.01.2018

to   11.02.2018 for a period of 30 days.           Therefore

compensation of Rs.30,000/­ is awarded to the

petitioner towards food,      nourishment, attendant

charges.


     77. Petitioner has spent amount for transport

even after discharge, she has            taken follow up

treatment. Therefore, Rs.2,000/­ is awarded to the

petitioner towards transport charges.


     78. It is the case of the petitioner that she was

earning    Rs.40,000/p.m.     by    conducting      tuitions.
 SCCH-1              48     MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




Except her oral evidence nothing is there on record.

Considering the year of accident her notional income is

taken as Rs.12,000/p.m.      Considering the nature of

the injury sustained by the petitioner, it might not be

possible for her to work for a minimum period of 2

months. Therefore, petitioner is awarded Rs.24,000/­

towards loss of income during the laid up period

and rest period.


     79. During the course of cross­examination of

PW­2 she has admitted that K.S.R.T.C. has paid

Rs.1,79,340/­ to the N.D.R.K. hospital and Rs.5,000/­

to her. Therefore, already       K.S.R.T.C. has spent an

amount of Rs.1,84,340/­ which is required to be paid

to the K.S.R.T.C. including that amount total amount

required to be awarded is Rs.3,10,340/­ . Out of it

K.S.R.T.C. is entitled for Rs.1,84,340/­ and petitioner

is entitled for Rs.1,26,000/­.
 SCCH-1                49     MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




      80. The details of compensation, to which the

petitioner is entitled to is as under:­

Sl.    Head of Compensation                         Amount
No.
1.     Pain and Sufferings             Rs.                   70,000­00

2.     Medical Expenses      Rs.                           1,84,340­00
       plus Rs.5000
3.     Food and nourishment, Rs.                             30,000­00
       attendant charges

4.     Transportation charges          Rs.                     2,000­00

5.     Loss of income during laid Rs.                        24,000­00
       up period
                  Total                Rs.                 3,10,340­00

      Compensation amount to           Rs.                1,26,000­00
             petitioner
  Medical bill amount to KSRTC         Rs.                1,84,340­00



      81.   The    total   compensation      determined      in

M.V.C.No.2165/2018 is Rs.3,10,340/­with interest at

6%p.a. from the date of the petition till realization. Out

of it already Rs.1,84,340/­ has been paid by the

KSRTC. The said amount is required to be paid to the
 SCCH-1                   50      MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




respondent No.1 KSRTC with interest at 6%p.a. from

the date of the petition till realization and petitioner is

entitled for balance amount of Rs.1,26,000/­with

interest at 6%p.a. from the date of the petition till

realization.


     82. Issue No.2 in M.V.CNo.2166/2018: The

petitioner          in        M.V.C.No.2166/2018,            Vinay

Ramachandra Bhat               has claimed compensation of

Rs.3,00,000/­ on various heads.


     83.     In view of         the above     discussions      and

principles laid down by their Lordships in              (2011) 1

SCC 343 ( Raj Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar and another)

referred       in        answering        Issue       No.2       of

M.V.C.No.3127/2018, we are required to calculate the

compensation amount entitled by the petitioner in this

case also.


     84. To prove what are the injuries sustained by

the petitioner in the accident, petitioner relied on his
 SCCH-1                51     MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




own oral evidence as PW­3. Ex.P.25 wound certificate ,

Ex.P.26 discharge summaries and Ex.P.27 medical

bills.


         85. From going through Ex.p.29 wound certificate

and discharge summary, it is clear that petitioner has

sustained in all 4 injuries. Two lacerated injury and

one tenderness are described as simple in nature.

Fracture of let clavicle is shown as grievous in nature.

From Ex.P.26, it is clear that petitioner was admitted

to hospital on 13.01.2018 at 5.30 a.m. . He was

discharged on the same day at 2.30 p.m. He was given

conservative treatment. Considering the nature of the

injury sustained by the petitioner in the accident

compensation of        Rs.30,000/­ is awarded to the

petitioner towards pain and sufferings.


         86. It is the case of the petitioner that he has

spent medical expenses. For that he has relied on

Ex.P.27, 8 series of medical bills amounting to
 SCCH-1               52       MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




Rs.31,115/­. During the course of cross­examination

of PW­3, he has admitted that KSRTC has paid

Rs.5,000/­. For that he has stated that he has not

personally received the amount. He did not know

whether his attender or hospital authority has received

the amount. The KSRTC has produced Ex.R.22 i.e.

receipt    for having received Rs.5,000/­. Along with

Ex.R.22 like any other case KSRTC has not produced

the medical bills. Therefore , it is clear that KSRTC has

not paid any medical bills. Therefore, under Ex.P.27

petitioner   is   entitled    for   medical     expenses      of

Rs.33,115/­. Out of that amount he has already

received Rs.5,000/­ from KSRTC. Therefore, petitioner

is entitled for Rs.28,115/­ and KSRTC is entitled for

Rs.5,000/­ paid as ex­gratia amount.


     87.     Petitioner      has    spent      amount        for

transportation , even after discharge, he has taken
 SCCH-1               53       MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




follow up treatment. Therefore, Rs.5,000/­ is awarded

to the petitioner towards transport charges.



     88. It is the case of the petitioner that he was

earning   Rs.27,000/p.m.       by   working      as   Software

Engineer in KPIT Technologies.             Except his oral

evidence nothing is there on record. During the course

of his cross­examination, questions were put regarding

non­production of documentary evidence. He has

stated that as KPIT Company has merged with Birla

Soft and demerged sometime later, therefore, it is not

possible for   him to produce the document to show

that he has sustained loss of 3 months salary. To

disbelieve the fact that he was working in a private

company situated at Electronic city nothing is elicited.

Therefore,     his        income     is     considered        as

Rs.25,000/p.m.. Considering the nature of the injury

sustained by the petitioner, it might not be possible for

him to work for a minimum period of one month.
 SCCH-1                54     MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




Therefore, petitioner is awarded Rs.25,000/­ towards

loss of income during the laid up period and rest

period.


      89. The details of compensation, to which the

petitioner is entitled to is as under:­



Sl.    Head of Compensation                         Amount
No.
1.     Pain and Sufferings             Rs.                   30,000­00

2.     Medical Expenses                Rs.                   33,115­00

3.     Transportation charges          Rs.                     5,000­00

4.     Loss of income during laid Rs.                        25,000­00
       up period
                  Total                Rs.                   93,115­00

      Compensation amount to           Rs.                  88,115­00
             petitioner
          amount to KSRTC              Rs.                    5,000­00



      90.   The    total   compensation      determined      in

M.V.C.No.2166/2018 is Rs.93,115/­with interest at
 SCCH-1                     55     MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




6%p.a. from the date of the petition till realization. Out

of it already Rs.5,000/­ has been paid by the KSRTC.

The said amount is required to be paid to the

respondent No.1 KSRTC with interest at 6%p.a. from

the date of the petition till realization and petitioner is

entitled    for        balance   amount    of   Rs.88,115/­with

interest at 6%p.a. from the date of the petition till

realization.


      91. Issue No.2 in M.V.CNo.2167/2018: The

petitioner in M.V.C.No.2167/2018, Balasubramanya

Rao      has claimed compensation of Rs.5,00,000/­ on

various heads.


      92.   In view of           the above      discussions     and

principles laid down by their Lordships in               (2011) 1

SCC 343 ( Raj Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar and another)

referred          in       answering       Issue       No.2       of

M.V.C.No.3127/2018, we are required to calculate the
 SCCH-1                   56       MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




compensation amount entitled by the petitioner in this

case also.


     93. To prove what are the injuries sustained by

the petitioner in the accident, he relied on Ex.P.37

wound certificate, Ex.P.38 C.T.Scan report, Ex.P.39

out patient bill, Ex.P.40 prescriptions and his oral

evidence as PW­5. In Ex.P.37 wound certificate, he has

sustained 3 injuries , second injury is mentioned as

grievous in nature, other two injuries are described as

simple in nature. As per x­ray there is fracture in

scapula.      Ex.P.38 is the discharge summary. In

discahrge     summary          findings    are    mentioned       as

displaced comminuted fracture seen involving the left

scapula,     bilateral    lungs     appear     normal.    No    e/o

contusion/laceration. Mediastinal structures appear

normal.       No         e/o      mediastinal         hematoma/

pneumomediastinum. He has treated conservatively.

He has not admitted in the hospital. Considering the
 SCCH-1             57         MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




nature of the injury sustained by the petitioner in the

accident compensation of Rs.30,000/­ is awarded to

the petitioner towards pain and sufferings.


     94. From going through Ex.P.38, 39 , it is clear

that petitioner has taken treatment at NDRK hospital

as well as B.G.S. Global hospital and at the time of

discharge he was directed to take follow up treatment.

Considering the said fact, petitioner is awarded

Rs.5,000/­ is awarded to the petitioner towards

transport charges.


     95. It is the case of the petitioner that he has

incurred medical expenses . For that he has produced

out patient cash bill for Rs.3,760/­ as per Ex.P.39 of

B.G.S.   Global   Hospital.        The    respondent       No.1

K.S.R.T.C. has not paid the same. During the course

of cross­examination, PW­5, has stated that KSRTC

has paid Rs.5,000/­ as compensation i.e., towards

treatment taken in N.D.R.K. hospital. Therefore, under
 SCCH-1               58      MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




Ex.P.39 petitioner is entitled for medical expenses by

rounding off the figure Rs.4,000/­ is awarded to the

petitioner towards Medical Expenses.


     96. As per Ex.R.2 and R.3, respondent No.1

KSRTC has paid Rs.5,000/­ as interim compensation

and they have paid Rs.18,820/­ towards medical

expenses of N.D.R.K. Hospital. Therefore, together

Rs.27,820/­ is awarded to the petitioner towards

Medical Expenses and out of it a sum of Rs.23,820/­

is required to be paid to the KSRTC.


     97. It is the case of the petitioner that he was

earning    Rs.48,000/p.m.     by    working     as     Fashion

Designer at Aravind Fashions Pvt. Ltd., M.G.Road,

Bengaluru.     During the course of cross­examination,

of PW­5 he has deposed that he is getting salary of

Rs.25,000/­    to    Rs.30,000/p.m.      Except      her   oral

evidence   nothing    is   there   on   record.      Therefore,

considering the year of accident his notional income is
 SCCH-1              59       MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




taken as Rs.12,000/p.m.        Considering the nature of

the injury sustained by the petitioner, it might not be

possible for her to work for a minimum period of one

month. Therefore, petitioner is awarded Rs.12,000/­

towards loss of income during the laid up period

and rest period.


      98. The details of compensation, to which the

petitioner is entitled to is as under:­

Sl.    Head of Compensation                         Amount
No.
1.     Pain and Sufferings             Rs.                   30,000­00

2.     Medical Expenses                Rs.                   27,820­00
       18,820+5000+4000
3.     Transportation charges          Rs.                     5,000­00

4.     Loss of income during laid Rs.                        12,000­00
       up period
               Total                   Rs.                   74,820­00

      Compensation amount to           Rs.                  51,000­00
             petitioner
  Medical bill amount to KSRTC         Rs.                  23,820­00
 SCCH-1                    60      MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




     99.    The        total    compensation       determined     in

M.V.C.No.2167/2018 is Rs.74,820/­with interest at

6%p.a. from the date of the petition till realization. Out

of it already Rs.23,820/­ has been paid by the KSRTC .

Therefoe Rs.23,820/­ with interest at 6%p.a. from the

date of the petition till realization           is required to be

paid to the respondent No.1 KSRTC and petitioner is

entitled   for        balance    amount    of    Rs.51,000/­with

interest at 6%p.a. from the date of the petition till

realization.


     100. Issue No.2 in M.V.C.No.2168/2018: The

petitioner in M.V.C.No.2168/2018, Pradeep H.,                   has

claimed compensation of Rs.3,00,000/­ on various

heads.


     101. In view of the above discussions and

principles laid down by their Lordships in               (2011) 1

SCC 343 ( Raj Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar and another)

referred         in       answering        Issue       No.2       of
 SCCH-1               61        MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




M.V.C.No.3127/2018, we are required to calculate the

compensation amount entitled by the petitioner in this

case also.


     102. To prove what are the injuries sustained by

the petitioner in the accident, he relied on his oral

evidence examined himself as PW­4, wound certificate

Ex.P.10, radiological report Ex.P.31, medical bills

Ex.P.32, prescriptions Ex.P.33. From Ex.P.30 and 31,

it is clear that petitioner has sustained two injuries

described as tenderness both injuries are described as

simple in nature. Ex.P.31 radiology report impression

is mentioned as +tear involving femoral attachment

site of anterior cruciate ligament, tear involving medial

collateral ligament, marrow edema involving lateral

tibial plateau. Considering the nature of the injury

sustained    by    the    petitioner    and   he    has    taken

treatment     as     out     patient,     compensation         of
 SCCH-1             62         MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




Rs.20,000/­ is awarded to the petitioner towards pain

and sufferings.


     103. It is the case of the petitioner that he has

incurred medical expenses of Rs.13,033/­ under

Sl.No.1 to 11 of Ex.P.32. As per Ex.R.4 ,R.5,R.6 KSRTC

has paid Rs.10,588/­. Out of it Rs.5,248/­ directly to

N.D.R.K.   hospital     and    Rs.5,340/­       to   Tejeswini

Hospital. In the chief examination of PW­4, he has

specifically averred that after taking treatment in

N.D.R.K. hospital, he had been shifted to Indiana

Hospital and Heart Institute ltd., and then to Tejaswini

hospital. Therefore, petitioner is      entitled for medical

expenses incurred by him under Ex.P.32 medical bills

for Rs.13,035/­, excluding amount directly paid by

KSRTC to two hospitals i.e., Rs.10,588/­. Therefore,

petitioner is awarded Rs.23,623/­ towards Medical

Expenses and out of it Rs.10,588/­ is required to be

paid to KSRTC.
 SCCH-1               63      MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




      104. Petitioner has taken treatment in 3 different

hospitals, he might have incurred conveyance charges.

Therefore, petitioner is awarded Rs.2,000/­           towards

transport charges.


      105. The details of compensation, to which the

petitioner is entitled to is as under:­

Sl.    Head of Compensation                         Amount
No.
1.     Pain and Sufferings             Rs.                   20,000­00

2.     Medical Expenses                Rs.                   13,035­00

3.     Medical     bills   paid    by Rs.                    10,588­00
       KSRTC
4.     Transportation charges          Rs.                     2,000­00

                 Total                 Rs.                   45,623­00

      Compensation amount to           Rs.                  35,035­00
             petitioner
  Medical bill amount to KSRTC         Rs.                  10,588­00



      106.   The   total   compensation      determined      in

M.V.C.No.2168/2018 is Rs.45,623/­with interest at
 SCCH-1                    64     MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




6%p.a. from the date of the petition till realization. Out

of it already Rs.10,588/­ has been paid by the KSRTC.

Therefore, Rs.10,588/­ with interest at 6%p.a. from

the date of the petition till realization is required to be

paid to the respondent No.1 KSRTC and petitioner is

entitled   for        balance   amount    of   Rs.35,035/­with

interest at 6%p.a. from the date of the petition till

realization.


     107. Issue No.2 in M.V.CNo.2169/2018: The

petitioner in M.V.C.No.2169/2018, Yashwanthi                   has

claimed compensation of Rs.5,00,000/­ on various

heads.


     108. In view of the above discussions and

principles laid down by their Lordships in              (2011) 1

SCC 343 ( Raj Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar and another)

referred         in       answering       Issue       No.2       of

M.V.C.No.3127/2018, we are required to calculate the
 SCCH-1              65      MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




compensation amount entitled by the petitioner in this

case also.


      109. To prove what are the injuries sustained by

the petitioner in the accident, she relied on the

evidence of her husband who is examined as PW­4 in

this case. In the further chief examination of PW­4, he

has      produced   wound       certificate    of   petitioner

Yeshwanthi as Ex.P.35 and OPD slip at Ex.P.36. From

Ex.P.35, it is clear that she has sustained 4 injuries,

lacerated wound , one tenderness and one abrasion.

Injury No.2 tenderness over right side of the chest is

described as grievous in nature. Other 3 injuries are

described as simple in nature. Ex.P.36 is discharge

card issued by Adarsh Hospital , which discloses

petitioner   took   treatment     as   an     inpatient   from

13.01.2018 to 21.01.2018, for a period of 8 days. Final

diagnosis is mentioned in Ex.P.36 as liver injury.

Considering the nature of the injury sustained by the
 SCCH-1             66      MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




petitioner in the accident Rs.40,000/­ is awarded to

the petitioner towards pain and sufferings.


     110. As per Ex.P.36 discharge card petitioner has

taken treatment as an inpatient for a period of 8 days.

Therefore Rs.8,000/­ is awarded to the petitioner

towards food, nourishment, attendant charges.


     111.   Petitioner   has   spent   amount      for   her

transportation as even after discharge. she has taken

follow up treatment. Therefore, Rs.2,000/­ is awarded

to the petitioner towards transport charges.


     112. During the course of cross­examination

PW­4 has admitted that KSRTC has paid Rs.29,767/­

towards medical expenses of petitioner. Therefore,

petitioner is not entitled for medical expenses but

Rs.29,767/­ is awarded towards medical expenses

already spent by K.S.R.T.C. and same is required to be
 SCCH-1              67       MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




paid to respondent No.1 K.S.R.T.C. with a direction to

the petitioner to pay the same to KSRTC.


      113. The details of compensation, to which the

petitioner is entitled to is as under:­

Sl.   Head of Compensation                          Amount
No.
1.    Pain and Sufferings              Rs.                   40,000­00

2.    Medical Expenses                 Rs.                   29,767­00

3.    Food and nourishment, Rs.                                8,000­00
      attendant charges

4.    Transportation charges           Rs.                     2,000­00

               Total                   Rs.                   79,767­00

    Compensation amount to             Rs.                  50,000­00
             petitioner
  Medical bill amount to KSRTC         Rs.                  29,767­00



      114.   The   total   compensation      determined      in

M.V.C.No.2169/2018 is Rs.79,767/­ with interest at

6%p.a. from the date of the petition till realization. Out

of it already Rs.29,767/­ has been paid by the

K.S.R.T.C. Therefore, Rs.29,767/­ with interest at
 SCCH-1                 68      MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




6%p.a. from the date of the petition till realization is

required to be paid to the respondent No.1 K.S.R.T.C.

and petitioner is entitled for balance amount of

Rs.50,000/­with interest at 6%p.a. from the date of the

petition till realization.


       115. Regarding entitlement of amount of ex­gratia

paid     by   the   KSRTC,     the   learned     Advocate     for

respondent No.1 KSRTC relied on the judgments of

Division      Bench,    High    Court     of   Karnataka       in

M.F.A.No.2167/2011 C/w.M.F.A.No.2168/2011 dated

10th January 2012 ( Cholamandalam MS General

Insurance       Company        Limited     Vs.Kumari       Baby

Pranamya and others). In that            case their Lordship

observed that "KSRTC had made ex­gratia payment of

Rs.1,65,000/­ and Rs.80,000/­ with reference to two

M.V.C.Petitions and ultimately their Lordship held that

out of the compensation amount determined the

direction was given to the insurance company to pay
 SCCH-1              69         MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




ex­gratia amount already paid by KSRTC to the

KSRTC". In view of the above said observation that the

respondent No.1, KSRTC has produced sufficient

material and from the admission given by PW­1 to 5 ,

it is proved that respondent No.1, KSRTC has paid the

medical expenses immediately after the accident. The

same     is   already    included      in    the     determined

compensation.     Out     of    determined         compensation

direction is issued to the insurance company to pay

respective amount referred above to the KSRTC which

was already paid by KSRTC to all 8 petitioners.


       116. The respondent No.1 being the owner and

respondent No.2 being the insurance company of the

KSRTC bus bearing No.KA­01­F­8531 are jointly and

severally liable to pay the compensation amount to the

petitioners in all 8 petitions. However, the respondent

No.2 being the insurance company is liable to pay the

compensation amount to the petitioners in all 8
 SCCH-1                70    MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018




petitions. For the above said reasons, Point No.2 is

answered accordingly.


      117. Point No.3:      In view of the discussions

made above, I proceed to pass the following: ­

                           ORDER

M.V.C. No.3127/2018 The petition filed by the petitioner is allowed in part against the respondents The total determined compensation is Rs.1,08,428/­. Out of the total compensation, the petitioner is entitled for Rs.70,000/­ with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation. An amount of Rs.38,428/­ is ordered to be paid to respondent No.1, KSRTC with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation.

The respondents No.1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation amount with SCCH-1 71 MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018 interest. However, the primary liability to pay the compensation amount is fixed on the respondent No.2 ­ Insurance Company and it is directed to pay the compensation amount within two months from the date of this order.

The entire compensation amount is ordered to be released to the petitioner.

M.V.C. No.3128/2018 The petition filed by the petitioner is allowed in part against the respondents The total determined compensation is Rs.9,13,040/­. Out of the total compensation, the petitioner is entitled for Rs.4,34,000/­ with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation. An amount of Rs.4,79,041/­ is ordered to be paid to respondent No.1, KSRTC with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation.

SCCH-1 72 MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018

The respondents No.1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation amount with interest. However, the primary liability to pay the compensation amount is fixed on the respondent No.2 ­ Insurance Company and it is directed to pay the compensation amount within two months from the date of this order.

The entire compensation amount with interest is ordered to be invested in high yielding fixed deposit in the name of the petitioner in any of the nationalized or scheduled bank of the choice of PW1 till the minor petitioner attain majority. PW­1 is at liberty to withdraw the periodical interest on the F.D. amount to meet the expenses of the minor petitioner. M.V.C. No.3129/2018 The petition filed by the petitioner is allowed in part against the respondents SCCH-1 73 MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018 The total determined compensation is Rs.46,280/­. Out of the total compensation, the petitioner is entitled for Rs.25,000/­ with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation. An amount of Rs.21,280/­ is ordered to be paid to respondent No.1, KSRTC with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation.

The respondents No.1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation amount with interest. However, the primary liability to pay the compensation amount is fixed on the respondent No.2 ­ Insurance Company and it is directed to pay the compensation amount within two months from the date of this order.

The entire compensation amount with interest is ordered to be invested in high yielding fixed deposit in the name of the petitioner in any of the nationalized or scheduled bank of the choice of PW1 till the minor SCCH-1 74 MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018 petitioner attain majority. PW­1 is at liberty to withdraw the periodical interest on the F.D. amount to meet the expenses of the minor petitioner. M.V.C. No.2165/2018 The petition filed by the petitioner is allowed in part against the respondents The total determined compensation is Rs.3,10,340/­. Out of the total compensation, the petitioner is entitled for Rs.1,26,000/­ with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation. An amount of Rs.1,84,340/­ is ordered to be paid to respondent No.1, KSRTC with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation.

The respondents No.1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation amount with interest. However, the primary liability to pay the compensation amount is fixed on the respondent No.2 SCCH-1 75 MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018 ­ Insurance Company and it is directed to pay the compensation amount within two months from the date of this order.

The entire compensation amount is ordered to be released to the petitioner.

M.V.C. No.2166/2018 The petition filed by the petitioner is allowed in part against the respondents The total determined compensation is Rs.93,115/­. Out of the total compensation, the petitioner is entitled for Rs.88,115/­ with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation. An amount of Rs.5000/­ is ordered to be paid to respondent No.1, KSRTC with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation.

The respondents No.1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation amount with SCCH-1 76 MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018 interest. However, the primary liability to pay the compensation amount is fixed on the respondent No.2 ­ Insurance Company and it is directed to pay the compensation amount within two months from the date of this order.

The entire compensation amount is ordered to be released to the petitioner.

M.V.C. No.2167/2018 The petition filed by the petitioner is allowed in part against the respondents The total determined compensation is Rs.74,820/­. Out of the total compensation, the petitioner is entitled for Rs.51,000/­ with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation. An amount of Rs.23,820/­ is ordered to be paid to respondent No.1, KSRTC with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation.

SCCH-1 77 MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018

The respondents No.1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation amount with interest. However, the primary liability to pay the compensation amount is fixed on the respondent No.2 ­ Insurance Company and it is directed to pay the compensation amount within two months from the date of this order.

The entire compensation amount is ordered to be released to the petitioner.

M.V.C. No.2168/2018 The petition filed by the petitioner is allowed in part against the respondents The total determined compensation is Rs.45,623/­. Out of the total compensation, the petitioner is entitled for Rs.35,035/­ with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation. An amount of Rs.10,588/­ is ordered to be paid to respondent No.1, KSRTC with interest at SCCH-1 78 MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018 the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation.

The respondents No.1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation amount with interest. However, the primary liability to pay the compensation amount is fixed on the respondent No.2 ­ Insurance Company and it is directed to pay the compensation amount within two months from the date of this order.

The entire compensation amount is ordered to be released to the petitioner.

M.V.C. No.2169/2018 The petition filed by the petitioner is allowed in part against the respondents The total determined compensation is Rs.79,767/­. Out of the total compensation, the petitioner is entitled for Rs.50,000/­ with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition SCCH-1 79 MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018 till realisation. An amount of Rs.29,767/­ is ordered to be paid to respondent No.1, KSRTC with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation.

The respondents No.1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation amount with interest. However, the primary liability to pay the compensation amount is fixed on the respondent No.2 ­ Insurance Company and it is directed to pay the compensation amount within two months from the date of this order.

The entire compensation amount is ordered to be released to the petitioner.

Advocate's fee is fixed at Rs.1,000/­ in each case. Original judgment shall be kept in MVC No.3127/2018 and its copies are in other cases. SCCH-1 80 MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018

Draw an award accordingly.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 29th day of April 2022) ( PRABHAVATI M.HIREMATH) Chief Judge, Court of Small Causes & Member, Prl. M.A.C.T. Bangalore.

ANNEXURES Witnesses examined on behalf of the petitioners:

P.W.1 :    Meka Lingam
P.W.2 :    Usha Ravikeerthi
P.W.3 :    Vinay Ramachandra Bhat
P.W.4 :    Pradeep H.
P.W.5 :    Balasubramanya Rao M.


Documents marked on behalf of the petitioners:

Ex.P­1 : Copy of FIR along with complaint Ex.P­2 : Copy of spot mahazar Ex.P­3 : Copy of Seizer mahazar Ex.P­4 : Copy of Spot sketch Ex.P.5 Copy of IMV Report Ex.P.6 Copy of Charge sheet SCCH-1 81 MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018 Ex.P. 7 Copy of Wound certificate Ex.P.8 Notarized copy of employment identity card of petitioner in MVC No.3127/2018(original compared and returned) Ex.P.9 Notarized copy of Aadhar card of petitioner in MVC No.3127/2018 Ex.P.10 Copy of Wound Certificate of petitioner in MVC No.3128/2018 Meka Ruthwin Ex.P.11 Discharge Summary of NDRK Hospital of petitioner in MVC No.3128/2018 Ex.P.12 Discharge Summaries (6) of Narayana Netralaya, Bengaluru Ex.P.13 EMR summaries of Narayana Netralaya Bengaluru (3) Ex.P.14 O.P.Case sheet of Narayana Health Medical Centre, Bengaluru Ex.P.15 Medical bills (20) of petitioner in MVC No.3128/2018 Ex.P.16 Prescriptions(6) of petitioner in MVC No.3128/2018 Ex.P.17 Copy of Wound Certificate of petitioner in MVC No.3129/2018 Meka Rishikah Ex.P.18 & Discharge Summary of petitioner in 19 MVC No.2165/2018 (2) Ex.P.20 Copy of wound certificate of petitioner in M.V.C.No.2165/2018 Ex.P.21 C.T.Scan Report of petitioner in MVC SCCH-1 82 MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018 No.2165/2018 Ex.P.22 Certificate issued by Doctor to the petitioner in M.V.C.No.2165/2018 Ex.P.23 X­ray and Report Ex.P.24 Notarized copy of Aadhaar Card of petitioner in MVC No.2165/2018 Ex.P.25 True copy of Wound Certificate of petitioner in MVC No.2166/2018 Ex.P.26 Discharge summary of petitioner in MVC No.2166/2018 Ex.P.27 Medical bills (8) Ex.P.28 Prescription Ex.P.29 Bank statement of petitioner in MVC No.2166/2018 Ex.P.30 Copy of wound certificate of petitioner in MVC No.2168/2018 Ex.P.31 Radiology Report of petitioner in MVC No.2168/2018 Ex.P.32 Medical bills(12) of petitioner in MVC No.2168/2018 Ex.P.33 Prescriptions (5) Ex.P.34 Notarized copy of Aadhaar card of petitioner in MVC No.2168/2018 (original compared and returned) Ex.P.35 Copy of wound certificate of petitioner in MVC No.2169/2018 Ex.P.36 OPD Card Ex.P.37 Copy of wound certificate of petitioner in MVC No.2167/2018 Ex.P.38 C.T.Scan Report SCCH-1 83 MVC No.3127-3129, 2165 to 2169/2018 Ex.P.39 Out patient bill of petitioner in MVC No.2167/2018 Ex.P.40 Prescription Ex.P.41 Notarized copy of Aadhaar card of petitioner in MVC No.2167/2018 Witnesses examined on behalf of the respondents :
RW­1 Prathima N. Documents marked on behalf of the respondents:
Ex.R.1         Authorization letter
Ex.R.2 to      Interim compensation and medical
R.21           bills paid in respect of MVC Nos.
2167/2018, 2168/2018, 2169/2018, 3127/2018, 3128/2018 and 3129/2018 Ex.R.22 Receipt for having paid interim compensation to petitioner in MVC No.2166/2018 ( PRABHAVATI M.HIREMATH) Chief Judge, Court of Small Causes & Member, Prl. M.A.C.T. Bangalore.