Bangalore District Court
Rathna K.S vs Raghavendra V.S on 24 January, 2026
KABC020039522023
BEFORE THE COURT OF 10th ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES
AND MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, AT:
BENGALURU
(SCCH-16)
Present: Sri. Mohammed Yunus Athani
B.A.,LL.B.,
X Addl Judge, Court of Small Causes
& Member, MACT, Bengaluru.
MVC No.786/2023
C/W MVC No.505/2023, MVC No.506/2023,
MVC No.736/2023 & MVC No.737/2023
Dated this 24th day of January, 2026
Petitioner in Rekha R. D/o Ramesh S.,
MVC 786/2023: Aged about 26 years,
Residing at No.238/C,
13th Main, 2nd Cross, Srinagar,
Banashankari, Bengaluru - 560 050.
(Sri K. Venkataramanareddy, Advocate)
Vs.
Respondents in 1. Srinatha M. S/o Munireddy H.V.,
MVC 786/2023: Major in age,
No.40, Ground Floor, Nanda Gokul
Nilaya, 1st Main, Dominic Layout,
Manjunathnagar, Virgo Nagar,
Bengaluru - 560 049.
2 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
(Owner of Innova car bearing
Reg. No.KA-41-P-0333)
(Sri Ravikumar S.L., Advocate)
2. IFFCO-TOKIO General Insurance
Company Ltd.,
No.141, Sri Shanthi Tower,
5th Floor, 3rd Main, East of NGEF
Layout, Kasturinagar,
Bengaluru - 560 043.
(Insurer of Innova car bearing
Reg. No.KA-41-P-0333 bearing
Policy No.ML830145 valid from
06-10-2021 to 05-10-2022)
(Sri T. Ramesh, Advocate)
3. Raghavendra V.S. S/o Sathyappa,
Major in age,
Oolavadi Village and Post,
Chintamani Taluk,
Chikkaballapura District - 563 125.
(Owner of lorry bearing
Reg. No.KA-67-0140)
(Ex-parte)
4. Royal Sundaram General Insurance
Co. Ltd.,
No.30, 3rd Floor, JNR City Centre,
Raja Ram Mohan Roy Road,
Sampangiramanagar,
3 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
Bengaluru - 560 027.
(Insurer of lorry bearing
Reg. No.KA-67-0140
Policy No.VGC07796570100 valid
from 03-01-2022 to 02-01-2023)
(Sri Ravi S. Samprathi, Advocate)
Petitioner in Rathna K.S. W/o Venkatesha,
MVC 505/2023: Aged about 52 years,
Residing at No.238/C, 13th Main,
2nd Cross, near PES College,
BSK 1st Stage, 2nd Block,
Bengaluru - 560 050.
(Sri Manjunatha M., Advocate)
Vs.
Respondents in 1. Raghavendra V.S. S/o Sathyappa,
MVC 505/2023: Major in age,
Oolavadi Village and Post,
Chintamani Taluk,
Chikkaballapura District - 563 125.
(Registered Owner of Goods vehicle
bearing Reg. No.KA-67-0140)
(Ex-parte)
2. B. Mahaboob Khan S/o Ibrahim Sab,
Aged about 40 years,
Ward No.17, 3rd Cross,
Chowdareddy Palya,
Chintamani Town,
4 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
Chikkaballapura District - 563 125.
(Purchaser of Goods Vehicle
bearing Reg. No.KA-67-0140)
(Ex-parte)
3. Royal Sundaram General Insurance
Co. Ltd.,
Service Branch Office,
No.30, 3rd Floor, JNR City Centre,
Raja Ram Mohan Roy Road,
Sampangiramanagar,
Bengaluru - 560 027.
(Insurer of Goods Vehicle bearing
Reg. No.KA-67-0140
Policy No.VGC07796570100 valid
from 03-01-2022 to 02-01-2023)
(Sri Ravi S. Samprathi, Advocate)
4. Mubarak S/o Syed Basheer,
Aged about 34 years,
Kolar Road, Tippu Nagar,
Chintamani Taluk,
Chikkaballapura District - 563 125.
(Driver of Goods Vehicle bearing
Reg. No.KA-67-0140)
(Ex-parte)
5. Srinatha M. S/o Munireddy H.V.,
Major in age,
No.40, Ground Floor, Nanda Gokul
5 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
Nilaya, 1st Main, Dominic Layout,
Manjunathnagar, Virgo Nagar,
Bengaluru - 560 049.
(Owner of Innova car bearing
Reg. No.KA-41-P-0333)
(Sri Umesha M., Advocate)
6. IFFCO-TOKIO General Insurance
Company Ltd.,
No.141, Sri Shanthi Tower,
5th Floor, 3rd Main, East of NGEF
Layout, Kasturinagar,
Bengaluru - 560 043.
Represented by its Managar Legal.
(Insurer of car bearing
Reg. No.KA-41-P-0333
Policy No.ML830145 valid from
06-10-2021 to 05-10-2022)
(Sri T. Ramesh, Advocate)
Petitioners in 1. Rathna K.S. W/o S. Venkatesha,
MVC 506/2023: Aged about 52 years,
2. Venkatesh S. S/o Late A. Shamanna,
Aged about 62 years,
Both are R/at No.238/C, 13th Main,
2nd Cross, near PES College,
BSK 1st Stage, 2nd Block,
Bengaluru - 560 050.
(Sri Manjunatha M., Advocate)
6 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
Vs.
Respondents in 1. Raghavendra V.S. S/o Sathyappa,
MVC 506/2023: Major in age,
Oolavadi Village and Post,
Chintamani Taluk,
Chikkaballapura District - 563 125.
(Registered Owner of Goods vehicle
bearing Reg. No.KA-67-0140)
(Ex-parte)
2. B. Mahaboob Khan S/o Ibrahim Sab,
Aged about 40 years,
Ward No.17, 3rd Cross,
Chowdareddy Palya,
Chintamani Town,
Chikkaballapura District - 563 125.
(Purchaser of Goods Vehicle
bearing Reg. No.KA-67-0140)
(Ex-parte)
3. Royal Sundaram General Insurance
Co. Ltd.,
Service Branch Office,
No.30, 3rd Floor, JNR City Centre,
Raja Ram Mohan Roy Road,
Sampangiramanagar,
Bengaluru - 560 027.
(Insurer of Goods Vehicle bearing
Reg. No.KA-67-0140
Policy No.VGC07796570100 valid
7 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
from 03-01-2022 to 02-01-2023)
(Sri Ravi S. Samprathi, Advocate)
4. Mubarak S/o Syed Basheer,
Aged about 34 years,
Kolar Road, Tippu Nagar,
Chintamani Taluk,
Chikkaballapura District - 563 125.
(Driver of Goods Vehicle bearing
Reg. No.KA-67-0140)
(Ex-parte)
Petitioner in Manjula P.N. @ Manjula W/o Gurudath
MVC 736/2023: S.,
Aged about 44 years,
Permanent address : # 168-A,
Narasapura Road, Bidaraguppe, Anekal,
Bengaluru - 562 107.
Presently R/at No.238/C, 13th Main,
2nd Cross, near PES College,
BSK 1st Stage, 2nd Block,
Bengaluru - 560 050.
(Sri Manjunatha M., Advocate)
Vs.
Respondents in 1. Raghavendra V.S. S/o Sathyappa,
MVC 736/2023: Major in age,
Oolavadi Village and Post,
Chintamani Taluk,
Chikkaballapura District - 563 125.
8 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
(Registered Owner of Goods vehicle
bearing Reg. No.KA-67-0140)
(Ex-parte)
2. B. Mahaboob Khan S/o Ibrahim Sab,
Aged about 40 years,
Ward No.17, 3rd Cross,
Chowdareddy Palya,
Chintamani Town,
Chikkaballapura District - 563 125.
(Purchaser of Goods Vehicle
bearing Reg. No.KA-67-0140)
(Ex-parte)
3. Royal Sundaram General Insurance
Co. Ltd.,
Service Branch Office,
No.30, 3rd Floor, JNR City Centre,
Raja Ram Mohan Roy Road,
Sampangiramanagar,
Bengaluru - 560 027.
(Insurer of Goods Vehicle bearing
Reg. No.KA-67-0140
Policy No.VGC07796570100 valid
from 03-01-2022 to 02-01-2023)
(Sri Ravi S. Samprathi, Advocate)
4. Mubarak S/o Syed Basheer,
Aged about 34 years,
Kolar Road, Tippu Nagar,
9 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
Chintamani Taluk,
Chikkaballapura District - 563 125.
(Driver of Goods Vehicle bearing
Reg. No.KA-67-0140)
(Ex-parte)
5. Srinatha M. S/o Munireddy H.V.,
Major in age,
No.40, Ground Floor, Nanda Gokul
Nilaya, 1st Main, Dominic Layout,
Manjunathnagar, Virgo Nagar,
Bengaluru - 560 049.
(Owner of Innova car bearing
Reg. No.KA-41-P-0333)
(Sri Umesha M., Advocate)
6. IFFCO-TOKIO General Insurance
Company Ltd.,
No.141, Sri Shanthi Tower,
5th Floor, 3rd Main, East of NGEF
Layout, Kasturinagar,
Bengaluru - 560 043.
Represented by its Managar Legal.
(Insurer of car bearing
Reg. No.KA-41-P-0333
Policy No.ML830145 valid from
06-10-2021 to 05-10-2022)
(Sri T. Ramesh, Advocate)
10 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
Petitioner in Subash K.B. @ Subash B. S/o Babureddy
MVC 737/2023: K.S.,
Aged about 24 years,
Permanent address : Konapalli Village
and Post, Chintamani Taluk,
Chikkaballapur District - 563 125.
Presently R/at No.238/C, 13th Main,
2nd Cross, near PES College,
BSK 1st Stage, 2nd Block,
Bengaluru - 560 050.
(Sri Manjunatha M., Advocate)
Vs.
Respondents in 1. Raghavendra V.S. S/o Sathyappa,
MVC 737/2023: Major in age,
Oolavadi Village and Post,
Chintamani Taluk,
Chikkaballapura District - 563 125.
(Registered Owner of Goods vehicle
bearing Reg. No.KA-67-0140)
(Ex-parte)
2. B. Mahaboob Khan S/o Ibrahim Sab,
Aged about 40 years,
Ward No.17, 3rd Cross,
Chowdareddy Palya,
Chintamani Town,
Chikkaballapura District - 563 125.
(Purchaser of Goods Vehicle
bearing Reg. No.KA-67-0140)
11 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
(Ex-parte)
3. Royal Sundaram General Insurance
Co. Ltd.,
Service Branch Office,
No.30, 3rd Floor, JNR City Centre,
Raja Ram Mohan Roy Road,
Sampangiramanagar,
Bengaluru - 560 027.
(Insurer of Goods Vehicle bearing
Reg. No.KA-67-0140
Policy No.VGC07796570100 valid
from 03-01-2022 to 02-01-2023)
(Sri Ravi S. Samprathi, Advocate)
4. Mubarak S/o Syed Basheer,
Aged about 34 years,
Kolar Road, Tippu Nagar,
Chintamani Taluk,
Chikkaballapura District - 563 125.
(Driver of Goods Vehicle bearing
Reg. No.KA-67-0140)
(Ex-parte)
5. Srinatha M. S/o Munireddy H.V.,
Major in age,
No.40, Ground Floor, Nanda Gokul
Nilaya, 1st Main, Dominic Layout,
Manjunathnagar, Virgo Nagar,
Bengaluru - 560 049.
12 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
(Owner of Innova car bearing
Reg. No.KA-41-P-0333)
(Sri Umesha M., Advocate)
6. IFFCO-TOKIO General Insurance
Company Ltd.,
No.141, Sri Shanthi Tower,
5th Floor, 3rd Main, East of NGEF
Layout, Kasturinagar,
Bengaluru - 560 043.
Represented by its Managar Legal.
(Insurer of car bearing
Reg. No.KA-41-P-0333
Policy No.ML830145 valid from
06-10-2021 to 05-10-2022)
(Sri T. Ramesh, Advocate)
COMMON JUDGMENT
These are petitions filed under Section 166 of Motor
Vehicles Act, seeking compensation of Rs.40,00,000/- in
MVC No.786/2023, Rs.15,00,000/- each in MVC No.505/2023
and MVC No.736/2023, Rs.1,00,00,000/- in MVC No.506/2023
and Rs.5,00,000/- in MVC No.737/2023, from the
respondents, on account of grievous injuries sustained by
the petitioners in MVC No.786/2023, MVC No.505/2023,
13 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
MVC No.736/2023 and MVC No.737/2023 and death of the
deceased Tilak Venkatesh @ Thilak Venkatesh in MVC
No.506/2023 in a road traffic accident.
2. The brief facts of the case are as follows :
On 11-08-2022, at about 1.45 p.m., the petitioners in
MVC No.786/2023, MVC No.505/2023, MVC No.736/2023
and MVC No.737/2023 and deceased Tilak Venkatesh @
Thilak Venkatesh in MVC No.506/2023 were traveling in
Innova car bearing Reg. No.KA-41-P-0333, driven by
deceased Tilak Venkatesh @ Thilak Venkatesh, from
Hyderabad side towards Bengaluru, slowly and cautiously,
on the extreme side of left lane, in order to give way for the
vehicles taking 'U' turn near Reddygollavarahalli cross. At
that time, the goods vehicle bearing No.KA-67-0140 had
been parked negligently on the left lane of the road,
without switching on parking indicator lights, giving an
impression to the vehicles coming from the rear side of said
vehicle that the said vehicle is moving on the road. As a
14 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
result, the driver of car could not anticipate that the said
goods vehicle had been parked on the road. However, when
the car reached nearer to goods vehicle so parked, having
visualized that the goods vehicle is not moving ahead but
wrongly parked, driver of the car tried to avoid colliding
with rear portion of that vehicle, swerved his car towards
left and also slowed down the car. Inspite of that, the right
front portion of car dashed to rear left side of parked lorry
and fell in left side ditch of the road. Due to the said impact,
the petitioners in MVC No.786/2023, MVC No.505/2023,
MVC No.736/2023 and MVC No.737/2023 sustained
grievous injuries and deceased Tilak Venkatesh @ Thilak
Venkatesh in MVC No.506/2023 sustained grievous injuries
and succumbed to said injuries on the spot. Immediately
after the accident, the petitioner in MVC No.786/2023 was
shifted to Government District Hospital, Chikkaballapura,
wherein she took first aid treatment and then she was
shifted to NIMHANS Hospital, Bengaluru, wherein she took
15 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
treatment as an in-patient. Earlier to the accident, she was
working as System Administrative Dept-IT in Exponus Even
Management, Bengaluru and earning a sum of Rs.35,000/-
per month. But, due to the accidental injuries, she has
become permanently disabled and thereby lost her earning
capacity. Likewise, the petitioner in MVC No.505/2023 was
working as home maker/house keeping and earning a sum
of Rs.25,000/- per month. But, due to the accidental injuries,
she has become permanently disabled and thereby lost her
earning capacity. The deceased in MVC No.506/2023 was
working as Business Analyst in Trigensoft Solutions (P) Ltd.,
Bengaluru and was earning a sum of Rs.40,000/- per
month. He was contributing his entire earnings to his
family. Due to untimely death of a sole bread earner, the
petitioners are struggling for their livelihood. The petitioner
in MVC No.736/2023 was working as home maker/house
keeping and earning a sum of Rs.25,000/- per month. But,
due to the accidental injuries, she has become permanently
16 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
disabled and thereby lost her earning capacity. The
petitioner in MVC No.737/2023 was working as Analyst and
A4 in Capgemini Technology Services India Ltd., Bengaluru
and earning a sum of Rs.29,878/- per month. But, due to the
accidental injuries, he has become permanently disabled
and thereby lost his earning capacity. The Paresendra Police
have registered the case against the drivers of the said
goods vehicle and Innova car for the offences punishable
under Section 279, 337 and 304(A) of I.P.C. The respondents
are the registered owner, purchaser, driver and insurer of
goods vehicle and owner and insurer of Innova car. Hence,
they are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to
the petitioners. Therefore, it is prayed to allow the petitions
and award compensation of Rs.40,00,000/- in MVC
No.786/2023, Rs.15,00,000/- each in MVC No.505/2023 and
MVC No.736/2023, Rs.1,00,00,000/- in MVC No.506/2023 and
Rs.5,00,000/- in MVC No.737/2023, with interest.
17 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
3. On service of notice to the respondents in MVC
No.786/2023, the respondents No.1, 2 and 4 have appeared
through their respective counsel and filed their separate
written statements. Whereas, the respondent No.3 did not
choose to appear and remained absent. Hence, the
respondent No.3 is placed as ex-parte. On service of notice
to the respondents in MVC No.505/2023, MVC No.506/2023,
MVC No.736/2023 and MVC No.737/2023, the respondents
No.3, 5 and 6 have appeared through their respective
counsel and filed their separate written statements.
Whereas, the respondent No.1, 2 and 4 did not choose to
appear and remained absent. Hence, the respondent No.1,
2 and 4 are placed as ex-parte.
4. The respondent No.1 in MVC No.786/2023 and the
respondent No.5 in MVC No.505/2023, MVC No.736/2023
and MVC No.737/2023, in his written statement has denied
all the allegations made in the petitions. He has contended
that, he is the owner of car bearing No.KA-41-P-0333 and
18 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
the same is insured for own damage risk too and by virtue
of that, the petitioners/occupants of car are required to be
insured by insurance company to the extent of risk claimed
by petitioners. Further it is contended that, the
compensation claimed is highly excessive and exorbitant.
He has contended that, there was no rash and negligent
driving of the driver of the car, the driver of lorry had
parked his vehicle on the road without any indication and
that was the only reason for the accident. He has denied the
age, income and avocation of the petitioners and deceased.
For the above denials and contentions, it is prayed to
dismiss the petitions.
5. Whereas, the respondent No.2 in MVC No.786/2023
and the respondent No.6 in MVC No.505/2023, MVC
No.736/2023 and MVC No.737/2023 in its written statement
has denied all the allegations made in the petitions. It has
admitted the issuance of insurance policy in respect of
Innova car bearing Reg. No.KA-41-P-0333 and its validity as
19 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
on the date of accident. It has contended that, the petition is
bad for non-compliance of provision under Sections 134(C)
and 158(6) of Motor Vehicles Act. Further it is contended that,
the Innova car bearing Reg. No.KA-41-P-0333 was not at all
involved in the alleged accident. Further it is contended that,
the driver of the lorry bearing No.KA-67-0140 was
responsible for the alleged accident, as the charge-sheet has
been filed against the driver of the said lorry for the offences
punishable under Section 337, 338 and 304(A) of IPC and
under Section 177 of Motor Vehicles Act. Further it is
contended that, the petition is liable to be dismissed for non-
joinder of necessary parties, namely the driver of Innova car
bearing Reg. No.KA-41-P-0333 was also proper and
necessary party for the adjudication of the above claim.
Further it is contended that, the driver of Innova car was not
holding valid and effective driving licence as on the date of
the accident. The owner of the said vehicle knowing fully well
that, his driver did not possess driving licence, has entrusted
20 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
his vehicle to the said driver and thereby committed breach
of terms and conditions of the policy. It has denied the age,
income and avocation of the petitioners in MVC No.786/2023,
MVC No.505/2023, MVC No.736/2023 and MVC No.737/2023
and deceased in MVC No.506/2023. Further, it has sought for
permission to contest the case even on behalf of owner of
the offending vehicle, under Section 170 of the Motor
Vehicles Act. Further it is contended that, the compensation
claimed is highly excessive and exorbitant. For the above
denials and contentions, it is prayed to dismiss the petitions.
6. Whereas, the respondent No.4 in MVC No.786/2023
and the respondent No.3 in MVC No.505/2023, MVC
No.506/2023 MVC No.736/2023 and MVC No.737/2023 in its
written statement has denied all the allegations made in the
petitions. It has sought protection under Sections 147 and
149 of Motor Vehicles Act. It has contended that, the petition
is bad for non-compliance of provision under Sections 134(C)
and 158(6) of Motor Vehicles Act. Further it is contended that,
21 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
the driver of the lorry was not holding valid and effective
driving licence as on the date of the accident. The owner of
the said vehicle knowing fully well that, his driver did not
possess driving licence, has entrusted his vehicle to the said
driver and thereby committed breach of terms and
conditions of the policy. Further it is contended that, the lorry
in question did not held valid permit and route permit as on
the date of accident. The owner by using the lorry without
valid permit has violated and contravened the provisions of
Motor Vehicles Act and the rules framed there under and
have committed the breach of the terms and conditions of
the policy willfully, intentionally and consciously. It has
admitted the issuance of insurance policy in respect of lorry
bearing Reg. No.KA-67-0140 and its validity as on the date of
accident. It has denied the occurrence of the accident and
involvement of lorry in the alleged accident. Further it is
contended that, as on the date of accident the insured lorry
was stationed on the left side of the road, so as to not to
22 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
cause any inconvenience to other drivers and road users, the
accident broad day light and stationing of the lorry was
clearly visible to other users of road. The accident did not
took place due to the negligence on the part of the driver of
the insured lorry. But, it has taken place due to the
negligence on the part of the driver of car, as the driver of
car without noticing the lorry that was stationed on the left
side of the road and without taking all the precautions, drove
the same in rash and negligent manner and dashed against
the hind portion of lorry and caused the accident. The police
after investigation have filed final report against the driver of
the car. It prima-facie establishes that, the accident has taken
place due to negligence on the part of the driver of car. It has
denied the age, income and avocation of the petitioners in
MVC No.786/2023, MVC No.505/2023, MVC No.736/2023 and
MVC No.737/2023 and deceased in MVC No.506/2023.
Further, it has sought for permission to contest the case
even on behalf of owner of the offending vehicle, under
23 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
Section 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Further it is contended
that, the compensation claimed is highly excessive and
exorbitant. For the above denials and contentions, it is
prayed to dismiss the petitions.
7. On the basis of rival pleadings of both the sides, the
following issues are framed:
Issues in MVC No.786/2023
1. Whether the petitioner proves that, she has
sustained grievous injuries in the road traffic
accident, alleged to have occurred on 11-08-
2022 at about 1.45 p.m., on Bagepalli-
Chikkaballapura NH-44 road, near
Reddygollarahalli Cross, Chikkaballapura
Taluk and District, due to the rash and
negligent driving of the drivers of the Innova
Car bearing Reg. No.KA-41-P-0333 and Lorry
bearing Reg. No.KA-67-0140 ?
2. Whether the petitioner is entitled for
compensation ? If so, what is the quantum
and from whom ?
24 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
3. What order or Award ?
Issues in MVC No.505/2023
1. Whether the petitioner proves that, she has
sustained grievous injuries in the road traffic
accident, alleged to have occurred on 11-08-
2022 at about 1.45 p.m., on Bagepalli-
Chikkaballapura NH-44 road, near
Reddygollarahalli Cross, Chikkaballapura
Taluk and District, due to the rash and
negligent driving of the drivers of the Innova
Car bearing Reg. No.KA-41-P-0333 and Lorry
bearing Reg. No.KA-67-0140 ?
2. Whether the petitioner is entitled for
compensation ? If so, what is the quantum
and from whom ?
3. What order or Award ?
Issues in MVC No.506/2023
1. Whether the petitioners prove that,
deceased Tilak Venkatesh @ Thilak
Venkatesh S/o Venkatesh S., has succumbed
25 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
to the injuries sustained in the road traffic
accident, alleged to have occurred on 11-08-
2022 at about 1.45 p.m., on Bagepalli-
Chikkaballapura NH-44 road, near
Reddygollarahalli Cross, Chikkaballapura
Taluk and District, due to the rash and
negligent driving of the driver of the Lorry
bearing Reg. No.KA-67-0140 ?
2. Whether the petitioners are entitled for
compensation ? If so, what is the quantum
and from whom ?
3. What order or Award ?
Issues in MVC No.736/2023
1. Whether the petitioner proves that, she has
sustained grievous injuries in the road traffic
accident, alleged to have occurred on 11-08-
2022 at about 1.45 p.m., on Bagepalli-
Chikkaballapura NH-44 road, near
Reddygollarahalli Cross, Chikkaballapura
Taluk and District, due to the rash and
negligent driving of the drivers of the Innova
Car bearing Reg. No.KA-41-P-0333 and Lorry
26 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
bearing Reg. No.KA-67-0140 ?
2. Whether the petitioner is entitled for
compensation ? If so, what is the quantum
and from whom ?
3. What order or Award ?
Issues in MVC No.737/2023
1. Whether the petitioner proves that, he has
sustained grievous injuries in the road traffic
accident, alleged to have occurred on 11-08-
2022 at about 1.45 p.m., on Bagepalli-
Chikkaballapura NH-44 road, near
Reddygollarahalli Cross, Chikkaballapura
Taluk and District, due to the rash and
negligent driving of the drivers of the Innova
Car bearing Reg. No.KA-41-P-0333 and Lorry
bearing Reg. No.KA-67-0140 ?
2. Whether the petitioner is entitled for
compensation ? If so, what is the quantum
and from whom ?
3. What order or Award ?
27 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
8. In order to prove their case, the petitioners in MVC
No.786/2023, MVC No.505/2023, MVC No.736/2023 and
MVC No.737/2023 have got examined themselves as P.W.1
and P.W.3 to P.W.5 respectively and got marked total 67
documents as Ex.P.1 to 67. Further, they have got examined
five more witnesses namely Rajanna S.K., Parimal Kumar,
Dr. R. Yatish, Dr. Somashekar and K. Venkatesh as P.W.2
and P.W.6 to P.W.9 respectively. On the other hand, the
respondent No.2 in MVC No.786/2023 and the respondent
No.6 in MVC No.505/2023, MVC No.736/2023 and MVC
No.737/2023 has examined its representative/Legal Officer
as R.W.1 and got marked one document as Ex.R.1. The
respondent No.4 in MVC No.786/2023 and the respondent
No.3 in MVC No.505/2023, MVC No.506/2023 MVC
No.736/2023 and MVC No.737/2023 has examined its
representative/State Head Legal as R.W.1 and got marked 2
documents as Ex.R.2 and 3. Whereas, the respondent No.1
in MVC No.786/2023 and the respondent No.5 in MVC
28 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
No.505/2023, MVC No.736/2023 and MVC No.737/2023 has
not adduced any evidence on his behalf.
9. I have heard the arguments of both the sides and
perused the entire material placed on record.
10. My findings on the above issues are as under:
In MVC No.786/2023, 505/2023 & 736/2023
Issue No.1: Affirmative
Issue No.2: Partly Affirmative
Issue No.3: As per the final order, for the
following:
In MVC No.506/2023 & 737/2023
Issue No.1: Partly Affirmative
Issue No.2: Partly Affirmative
Issue No.3: As per the final order, for the
following:
REASONS
11. Issue No.1 in all the cases: It is specific case of the
petitioners that, on 11-08-2022, at about 1.45 p.m., when
29 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
the petitioners in MVC No.786/2023, MVC No.505/2023,
MVC No.736/2023 and MVC No.737/2023 and deceased
Tilak Venkatesh @ Thilak Venkatesh in MVC No.506/2023
were traveling in Innova car bearing Reg. No.KA-41-P-0333,
the same being driven by the Tilak Venkatesh @ Thilak
Venkatesh, slowly, cautiously and on the extreme left side
of the road, at that time the offending goods vehicle
bearing No.KA-67-0140 had been parked negligently on the
left lane of the road, without switching on parking indicator.
As a result, the driver of car could not anticipate that the
said goods vehicle had been parked on the road and inspite
of his best efforts to avoid colliding with the said lorry, the
car dashed to rear left side of parked lorry and thereafter
fell in left side ditch of the road. Due to the said impact, the
petitioners in MVC No.786/2023, MVC No.505/2023, MVC
No.736/2023 and MVC No.737/2023 sustained grievous
injuries and deceased Tilak Venkatesh @ Thilak Venkatesh
30 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
in MVC No.506/2023 sustained grievous injuries and
succumbed to said injuries on the spot.
12. In order to prove their case, the petitioners in MVC
No.786/2023, MVC No.505/2023, MVC No.736/2023 and
MVC No.737/2023 have got examined themselves as P.W.1
and P.W.3 to P.W.5 respectively, by filing their examination-
in-chief affidavits, wherein they have reiterated the entire
averments made in the petition. In support of their oral
evidence, the petitioners have got marked 67 documents as
Ex.P.1 to 67. Out of the said documents, Ex.P.1 is certified
copy of F.I.R., Ex.P.2 is certified copy of first information
statement, Ex.P.3 is certified copy of spot-mahazer, Ex.P.4 is
certified copy of sketch, Ex.P.5 is certified copy of Motor
Vehicle Accident report, Ex.P.6 is certified copy of wound
certificate, Ex.P.7 is certified copy of charge-sheet, Ex.P.8 to
11 are certified copy of notice under Section 133 of Motor
Vehicles Act and its reply, Ex.P.12 and 13 are discharge
summaries (total 2), Ex.P.14 are medical bills (total 20),
31 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
Ex.P.15 are prescriptions, Ex.P.16 are marks cards (total 7),
Ex.P.17 is degree certificate, Ex.P.18 is appointment letter,
Ex.P.19 is notarized copy of identity card, Ex.P.20 is
notarized copy of PAN card, Ex.P.21 is notarized copy of
Aadhar card, Ex.P.22 are scan films, Ex.P.23 are pay slips,
Ex.P.24 is discharge summary, Ex.P.25 is authorization
letter, Ex.P.26 is case sheet, Ex.P.27 is certified copy of order
sheet in Crime No.162/2022, Ex.P.28 is certified copy of
insurance policy of vehicle bearing No.KA-67-0140, Ex.P.29
is certified copy of wound certificate, Ex.P.30 is out-patient
booklet of Victoria Hospital, Ex.P.31 is discharge summary,
Ex.P.32 is medical certificate issued by KIMS Hospital,
Ex.P.33 are medical bills (total 26), Ex.P.34 is certified copy
of post-mortem report of deceased Tilak Venkatesh, Ex.P.35
is certified copy of driving licence of deceased, Ex.P.36 is
notarized copy of Aadhar card of P.W.3, Ex.P.37 is notarized
copy of Aadhar card of petitioner No.2 in MVC No.506/2023,
Ex.P.38 is appointment letter of deceased along with salary
32 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
structure, annexure-I, Ex.P.39 is HDFC Bank accounts
statement of deceased, Ex.P.40 is pay slip of July-2022 of
deceased, Ex.P.41 is Bachelor of Engineering Convocation
certificate of deceased, Ex.P.42 are MBA marks cards of
deceased (total 3), Ex.P.43 is certified copy of wound
certificate, Ex.P.44 are medical bills (total 9), Ex.P.45 is
notarized copy of Aadhar card, Ex.P.46 is doctor's certificate
regarding cost of future operation, Ex.P.47 is certified copy
of wound certificate, Ex.P.48 is OPD card of KIMS Hospital,
Ex.P.49 is outpatient treatment slip of KIMS Hospital,
Ex.P.50 are medical bills, Ex.P.51 is notarized copy of Aadhar
card, Ex.P.52 is authorization letter, Ex.P.53 is letter of intent
dated 11-05-2022, Ex.P.54 is offer letter dated 16-05-2022,
Ex.P.55 is annezure-I/salary structure, Ex.P.56 are salary
slips (total 3), Ex.P.57 are articles of association and Form
No.1 certificate of incorporation, Ex.P.58 is certificate under
Section 63 of BSA, Ex.P.59 are out-patient records, Ex.P.60
are in-patient medical records, Ex.P.61 is x-ray film, Ex.P.62
33 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
are in-patient records, Ex.P.63 is out-patient slip, Ex.P.64 is
recent x-ray film, Ex.P.65 are MRI reports (total 11), Ex.P.66
is authorization letter and Ex.P.67 is case-sheet.
13. Further, on meticulously going through the police
documents marked as Ex.P.1 to 11, 29, 43 and 47, prima-
facia it reveals that, the alleged accident has taken place
due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of offending
Innova car bearing No.KA-41-P-0333 and dashing the same
to the goods vehicle bearing No.KA-67-0140, which was
parked negligently on the left lane of the road, without
switching on parking indicator lights. Due to the said
impact, the petitioners in MVC No.786/2023, MVC
No.505/2023, MVC No.736/2023 and MVC No.737/2023, who
were inmates of the said car have sustained grievous
injuries and deceased Venkatesh @ Thilak Venkatesh in
MVC No.506/2023, who was the driver of said car has
sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to said injuries
on the spot. The investigation officer in his Ex.P.7 final
34 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
report/charge-sheet has clearly stated that, the alleged
accident has occurred due to rash and negligent driving of
the drivers of offending Innova car bearing No.KA-41-P-
0333 and due to negligently parking of lorry bearing No.KA-
67-0140 on the road, by its driver.
14. At the outset it is pertinent to note that, in both the
cases, there is no dispute with regard to date, time and
place of accident, issuance of insurance policy by
respondent No.2 & 4, in respect of Innova car bearing
No.KA-41-P-0333 and lorry bearing No.KA-67-0140
respectively and its validity as on the date of accident.
Further, the above oral and documentary evidence placed
on record by the petitioners has remained undisputed by
the owner and driver of offending goods vehicle, as they did
not choose to appear and contest the case of petitioners.
Whereas, the respondent No.2 in MVC No.786/2023 and the
respondent No.6 in MVC No.505/2023, MVC No.736/2023
and MVC No.737/2023 have specifically denied the above
35 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
averred facts and circumstances of the accident and have
taken specific defence that, the accident in question has
occurred solely due to rash and negligent driving of the
driver of the lorry bearing Reg. No.KA-67-0140 and there
was no negligence on the part of the driver of Innova car
bearing No.KA-41-P-0333. Whereas, the respondent No.4 in
MVC No.786/2023 and the respondent No.3 in MVC
No.505/2023, MVC No.506/2023 MVC No.736/2023 and MVC
No.737/2023 have specifically denied the above averred
facts and circumstances of the accident and have taken
specific defence that, the accident in question has occurred
solely due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the
Innova car bearing No.KA-41-P-0333 and there was no
negligence on the part of the driver of lorry bearing Reg.
No.KA-67-0140. In order to establish the above contentions,
they have examined their representative/Legal Officer and
State Legal Head as R.W.1 and R.W.2 respectively. Except
the self serving statements of R.W.1 and R.W.2, there is no
36 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
other corroborative oral or documentary evidence placed
on record by the respondents to establish the said
contentions. Likewise, on the other hand, except the self
serving statements of petitioners, there is no other
corroborative oral and documentary evidence placed on
record by the petitioners to show that, the said accident has
occurred solely due to negligent act of parking of lorry
bearing Reg. No.KA-67-0140 on the road by its driver and
there was no fault on the part of the driver of Innova car
bearing No.KA-41-P-0333. The documents produced and
got marked by the petitioners themselves clearly goes to
show that, the accident in question has occurred due to
rash and negligent driving of the driver of Innova car
bearing No.KA-41-P-0333 and the driver of lorry bearing
Reg. No.KA-67-0140. The entire investigation records
produced and got marked by the petitioners clearly
establishes that, due to contributory negligence on the part
of the deceased Venkatesh @ Thilak Venkatesh, who was
37 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
the driver of Innova car bearing No.KA-41-P-033 and driver
of lorry bearing Reg. No.KA-67-0140 the said accident has
taken place. Admittedly, the said Ex.P.7 final report/charge-
sheet filed against the drivers of both the vehicles has not
been challenged by either by the owners of said vehicles, or
by the driver of lorry bearing Reg. No.KA-67-0140. The
manner in which the accident has occurred and the place
and time of accident, clearly goes to show that, there was
contributory negligence on the part of the drivers of both
the offending vehicles. It is pertinent to note that, the
accident has taken place in the day hours i.e. 01:45 p.m. If
the driver of offending lorry had taken precautionary
measures while parking his vehicle on the national highway
road, by following the traffic rules and regulations and if he
had switched on the parking indicators of his vehicle or had
given any other indications, so that the drivers of other
vehicles passing through the said road can easily identify
that a vehicle has been parked on the said road, the said
38 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
accident would not have taken place. On the other hand, if
the driver of offending Innova car had driven his car
carefully, at a moderate speed, having proper look at the
vehicles moving on the said road or parked beside the said
road, he could have avoided the said accident. No doubt, as
per Ex.P.3 spot mahazar and Ex.P.4 sketch, at the time of
accident the offending lorry was parked on the extreme left
side of the road. But, there is absolutely no evidence on
record to show that, there was provision for parking of
vehicles at the place of accident and the driver of said lorry
had parked the same in the permitted parking place. On the
other hand, there is absolutely no evidence on record to
show that, even though it was the day hour, the driver of
their car could not see the parked lorry due to bad weather
or due to some other vehicle moving infront of said car.
Even there are no such pleadings. Further it is pertinent to
note that, the petitioner in M.V.C.No.786/2023, who was
also one of the inmate of offending Innova car, has
39 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
unequivocally admitted in her petition itself and also
deposed the same in her examination-in-chief affidavit that,
at the time of accident the driver of Innova car was driving
the same with high speed, in rash and negligent manner,
without following the traffic rules and regulations and
without observing the lorry being parked, dashed his car
against the rare left side portion of the said lorry.
Therefore, in such circumstances and for the above stated
reasons, this Court is of the considered opinion that, there
is equal contributory negligence on the part of the drivers
of both the offending vehicles.
15. Further, the Ex.P.3 spot mahazar and Ex.P.4 sketch
clearly speaks that, the accident has taken place on the left
side on Bagepalli-Chikkaballapura NH-44 road, near
Reddygollavarihalli Cross, Chikkaballapura Taluk and
District, in between offending Innova car bearing No.KA-41-
P-0333 and parked lorry bearing Reg. No.KA-67-0140.
Further, as per the Motor Vehicle Accident Report, which is
40 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
marked as Ex.P.5, the accident has not taken place due to
any mechanical defects in the vehicles involved in the
accident. When the accident has not taken place due to any
mechanical defects in the vehicles involved in the accident,
then in the present facts and circumstances of the case, it
can be presumed that, the said accident had occurred due
to rash and negligent driving of the drivers of both the
vehicles. Further, as per the Ex.P.7 final report/charge-
sheet, the alleged accident has occurred due to rash and
negligent driving of the drivers of offending Innova car
bearing No.KA-41-P-0333 and due to negligently parking of
lorry bearing No.KA-67-0140 on the road, by its driver and
the petitioners in MVC No.786/2023, MVC No.505/2023,
MVC No.736/2023 and MVC No.737/2023 have sustained
grievous injuries and deceased Tilak Venkatesh @ Thilak
Venkatesh in MVC No.506/2023 has sustained grievous
injuries and succumbed to said injuries on the spot.
41 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
16. Further, the Ex.P.34 post-mortem report, clearly
speaks that, deceased Tilak Venkatesh @ Thilak Venkatesh
has died due to head injury and laceration of brain, blunt
force trauma sustained to head in the road traffic accident.
Further, on meticulously going through the medical records
placed on record, it clearly reveals that the petitioners in
MVC No.786/2023, MVC No.505/2023, MVC No.736/2023
and MVC No.737/2023 have sustained grievous injuries. On
the other hand, the respondents have not produced any
contrary or rebuttal evidence to show that, the above
medical records are false. In such circumstances and in the
light of above observations, it can safely be held that, the
respondents have failed to rebut the oral and documentary
evidence placed on record by the petitioners regarding the
rash and negligent driving of the drivers of the offending
Innova car bearing No.KA-41-P-0333 and lorry bearing
No.KA-67-0140 and the injuries caused to the petitioners in
MVC No.786/2023, MVC No.505/2023, MVC No.736/2023
42 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
and MVC No.737/2023 and cause of death of deceased Tilak
Venkatesh @ Thilak Venkatesh in MVC No.506/2023.
17. Further, it is well settled principle of law that, in a case
relating to the Motor Accident Claims, the claimants are not
required to prove the case as required to be done in a
criminal trial. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
Parameshwari V/s Amir Chand and others, reported in
(2011) 11 SCC 635, has clearly held that, "in a road accident
claim cases the strict principle of proof in a criminal case
are not required."
18. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Bimla Devi
and others V/s Himachal Road Transport Corporation
and others, reported in (2009) 13 SCC 513, has clearly held
that, " in a case relating to the Motor Accident Claims, the
claimants are merely required to establish their case on
touch stone of preponderance of probability and the
43 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
standard of proof on beyond reasonable doubt could not be
applied."
19. Therefore, in the light of observations made in the
above cited decisions and for the above stated reasons, this
Court is of the considered opinion that, the petitioners have
successfully proved that, the petitioners in MVC
No.786/2023, MVC No.505/2023 and MVC No.736/2023 have
sustained grievous injuries and the petitioner in MVC
No.737/2023 has sustained simple injuries and the
deceased Tilak Venkatesh @ Thilak Venkatesh in MVC
No.506/2023 has succumbed to grievous injuries, sustained
in the road traffic accident occurred on 11-08-2022 at about
1.45 p.m., on Bagepalli-Chikkaballapura NH-44 road, near
Reddygollavarihalli Cross, Chikkaballapura Taluk and
District, due to rash and negligent driving of the drivers of
both the vehicles i.e. Innova car bearing No.KA-41-P-0333
and lorry bearing No.KA-67-0140 and they have equally
contributed in the cause of accident. Hence, I answer Issue
44 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
No.1 in MVC No.786/2023, MVC No.505/2023 and MVC
No.736/2023 in Affirmative and in MVC No.506/2023 and
MVC No.737/2023 in Partly Affirmative.
20. Issue No.2 in MVC No.786/2023: While answering the
above issues this Court has come to conclusion that, the
petitioner has successfully proved that, the accident has
taken place due to rash and negligent driving of the drivers
of the Innova car bearing No.KA-41-P-0333 and lorry
bearing No.KA-67-0140 and she has sustained grievous
injuries in the said accident. As per the medical records
placed on record by the petitioner, she has sustained
traumatic CSF Rhinorrhea, fracture right frontal bones and
right maxillary sinus. Therefore, this Court is of the further
opinion that, the petitioner is entitled for compensation
under various heads. The damages are to be assessed
under two heads i.e. pecuniary damages, such as medical
treatment, attendants, transport, actual loss of earning,
future loss of earning etc., and non-pecuniary damages,
45 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
such as mental and physical shock, loss of amenities, loss of
expectation of life, loss of prospects of marriage etc. The
petitioner is entitled for compensation under the following
heads:
i) Towards loss of future income: The petitioner has
deposed that, earlier to the accident she was working as
System Administrative Dep-IT in Exponus Event
Management, Bengaluru and was earning a sum of
Rs.35,000/- per month. But, due to accidental injuries she
has become permanently disabled and thereby lost her
earning capacity. But, the petitioner has neither produced
any document nor examined any doctor to establish that,
due to injuries sustained in the accident she has suffered
any physical disability or deformity. The petitioner has failed
to prove that, due to accidental injuries she has suffered
any physical disability and she is not in a position to
continue her avocation or perform her regular work and
thereby, she has lost her earning capacity. In such
46 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
circumstances, the question of awarding compensation
under head loss of future income due to permanent
physical disability does not arise at all. Hence, no
compensation is awarded under the head of loss of future
income due to disability.
ii) Medical expenses: The petitioner has deposed
that, she has incurred expenses of Rs.4,00,000/- towards
medical, conveyance, nourishment and other incidental
charge etc. In order to prove the same, she has produced
20 medical bills, as per Ex.P.14. All the bills have been
examined carefully and found that the petitioner has spent
total amount of Rs.2,55,337/- towards medical expenses.
Therefore, the petitioner is entitled for Rs.2,55,337/- under
the head of medical expenses.
iii) Pain and sufferings: In the present case the
petitioner has sustained grievous injury i.e. traumatic CSF
Rhinorrhea, fracture right frontal bones and right maxillary
sinus. As per Ex.P.12, 13 and 24 discharge summaries (total
47 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
3), the petitioner has taken treatment as in-patient for 14
days from 13-08-2022 to 18-08-2022, 18-08-2022 to 25-08-
2022 and on 12-08-2022 in A.V. Multispeciality Hospital,
Bengaluru and NIMHANS Hospital, Bengaluru. In such
circumstances, certainly the petitioner would have suffered
pain and sufferings. Therefore, taking into consideration
the injury sustained by the petitioner, this Court is of the
opinion that, compensation amount of Rs.60,000/- is to be
awarded to the petitioner towards pain and sufferings.
iv) Attendant charges: As per Ex.P.12, 13 and 24
discharge summaries (total 3), the petitioner has taken
treatment as in-patient for 14 days in A.V. Multispeciality
Hospital, Bengaluru and NIMHANS Hospital, Bengaluru. She
might have spent considerable amount towards attendant
charges during the said period. Therefore, compensation of
Rs.1000 x 14 = Rs.14,000/- is awarded towards the
attendant charges.
48 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
v) Food and nourishment: As per Ex.P.12, 13 and
24 discharge summaries (total 3), the petitioner has taken
treatment as in-patient for 14 days in A.V. Multispeciality
Hospital, Bengaluru and NIMHANS Hospital, Bengaluru. She
might have spent considerable amount towards food and
nourishment during the said period. Therefore,
compensation of Rs.800 x 14 = Rs.11,200/- is awarded
towards food and nourishment charges.
vi) Conveyance expenses: The petitioner is the
resident of Srinagar, Banashankari, Bengaluru, the accident
has occurred on Bagepalli-Chikkaballapura NH-44 road,
near Reddygollavarihalli Cross, Chikkaballapura Taluk and
District and she has taken treatment at A.V. Multispeciality
Hospital, Bengaluru and NIMHANS Hospital, Bengaluru.
Taking into consideration the distance between the above
places, compensation of Rs.10,000/- is awarded towards
conveyance.
49 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
vii) Loss of income during treatment period: The
petitioner has deposed in her evidence that, before
accident she was working as System Administrative Dep-IT
in Exponus Event Management, Bengaluru and was earning
a sum of Rs.35,000/- per month. Further, she has deposed
that, due to grievous injuries suffered in the said accident
she is unable to do work and continue her avocation. The
respondents have specifically denied the same. In such
circumstances, the burden was on the petitioner to prove
her avocation and income. But, the petitioner has failed to
establish the same through cogent and corroborative
evidence. She has not produced any document to prove her
avocation and income. In such circumstances, there is no
other option before this Court except to consider the
notional income as per the guidelines of the Karnataka
State Legal Services Authority. The accident has taken place
in the year 2022. Hence, the notional income of the
petitioner is considered as Rs.15,500/- per month. The
50 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
petitioner has taken treatment for 14 days as in-patient at
A.V. Multispeciality Hospital, Bengaluru and NIMHANS
Hospital, Bengaluru, for the grievous injury caused to her.
She might have taken rest for about 2 months and lost his
income for the said period. Therefore, Rs.15,500 x 2 =
Rs.31,000/- is awarded towards loss of income during
treatment period.
viii) Loss of amenities: It is evident from the
documents placed on record that, as on the date of accident
the age of the petitioner was 26 years and unfortunately
she has suffered grievous injury in the said accident and
undergone treatment for 14 days as in-patient in A.V.
Multispeciality Hospital, Bengaluru and NIMHANS Hospital,
Bengaluru. Further, it might have taken about 2 months
time for complete curing of the injury suffered by her.
Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that, awarding
compensation of Rs.40,000/- towards loss of amenities
during the treatment period would be just and reasonable.
51 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
ix) Future medical expenses: The petitioner has
neither adduced any evidence nor produced any document
to show that, she requires any further treatment for the
injury sustained in the accident. In such circumstances, the
question of awarding compensation for future medical
expenses does not arise at all. Therefore, no compensation
is awarded under this particular head.
21. Accordingly, the petitioner is entitled for
compensation under different heads as follows :
1. Loss of future income -Nil-
2. Medical expenses 2,55,337-00
3. Pain and sufferings 60,000-00
4. Attendant charges 14,000-00
5. Food and nourishment 11,200-00
6. Conveyance expenses 10,000-00
7. Loss of income during 31,000-00
treatment period
8. Loss of amenities 40,000-00
9. Future medical expenses -Nil-
Total Rs. 4,21,537-00
52 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion
that, the petitioner is entitled for compensation of
Rs.4,21,537/-, with interest at the rate of 6% per annum,
from the date of petition till its realization.
22. Issue No.2 in MVC No.505/2023: While answering the
above issue this Court has come to conclusion that, the
petitioner has successfully proved that, the accident has
taken place due to rash and negligent driving of the drivers
of the Innova car bearing No.KA-41-P-0333 and lorry
bearing No.KA-67-0140 and she has sustained grievous
injuries in the said accident. As per the medical records
placed on record by the petitioner, she has sustained
compression fracture of L1, D2, D3 and D4 vertebra.
Therefore, this Court is of the further opinion that, the
petitioner is entitled for compensation under various heads.
The damages are to be assessed under two heads i.e.
pecuniary damages, such as medical treatment, attendants,
transport, actual loss of earning, future loss of earning etc.,
53 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
and non-pecuniary damages, such as mental and physical
shock, loss of amenities, loss of expectation of life, loss of
prospects of marriage etc. The petitioner is entitled for
compensation under the following heads:
i) Towards loss of future income: In order to
determine the compensation towards loss of future income,
the age, monthly income and disability of the petitioner are
to be determined. To prove her age, the petitioner has
produced the notarised copy of her Aadhar card, which is
marked as Ex.P.36. As per Ex.P.36, the date of birth of the
petitioner is 05-07-1970. The accident has taken place on
11-08-2022 at about 1.45 P.M. This clearly goes to show
that, the age of the petitioner as on the date of accident
was 52 years. Further, the P.W.8, who is the doctor, who has
examined the petitioner for the purpose of assessment of
disability, has clearly deposed in his examination-in-chief
affidavit that, on clinical examination he found that, the
petitioner has sustained compression fracture of L1, D2, D3
54 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
and D4 vertebra and for the said injuries the petitioner has
taken conservative treatment. Further he has deposed that,
on clinical and radiological examination of injuries suffered
by the petitioner he found that, the petitioner has suffered
permanent physical disability of 48% to the spine and 16%
to the whole body. The Ex.P.29 wound certificate, Ex.P.30
outpatient booklet of Victoria Hospital, Ex.P.31 discharge
summary of KIMS Hospital, Ex.P.32 medical certificate
issued by KIMS Hospital, Ex.P.62 inpatient records, Ex.P.63
outpatient slip, Ex.P.64 recent x-ray film and Ex.P.65 MRI
reports (total 11) also clearly speaks that, the petitioner has
suffered the above stated injuries and for the said injuries
she has taken conservative treatment. Though, the learned
counsel for respondents No.3 and 6 have cross-examined
P.W.8 in length, nothing worth has been elicited from his
mouth which creates doubt on the veracity of his evidence.
He has clearly denied the suggestions made to him that, the
petitioner has not suffered any disability and he has
55 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
exaggerated the percentage of disability. Further it is
pertinent to note that, the P.W.8 has deposed in his
evidence that, the accident has occurred on 11-08-2022 and
he has assessed the disability to the petitioner on 23-11-
2024, which is after lapse of two years and three months
from the date of injuries caused to the petitioner. Further
he has admitted that, the petitioner has not undergone
surgery, the fracture is united, he has assessed only
physical disability, the petitioner has taken conservative
treatment and she has no neurological deficit. Therefore, in
such circumstances and taking into consideration the age
of the petitioner, injuries sustained, avocation of the
petitioner, duration of treatment and oral and documentary
evidence on record, this Court is of the opinion that,
considering the disability of 12% to the whole body of the
petitioner would be justified. Hence, in the instant case the
disability of 12% to the whole body of the petitioner is
considered.
56 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
a) The petitioner has deposed in her evidence that,
before accident she was working as home maker/house
keeping and earning a sum of Rs.25,000/- per month.
Further she has deposed that, due to grievous injuries
suffered in the said accident she is unable to do her work.
The respondents have specifically denied the same. In such
circumstances, the burden was on the petitioner to prove
her avocation and income. But, the petitioner has failed to
establish the same through cogent and corroborative
evidence. She has not produced any document to show
that, before accident she was working as home
maker/house keeping and earning a sum of Rs.25,000/- per
month. Therefore, in such circumstances, there is no other
option before this Court, except to consider the notional
income as per the guidelines of the Karnataka State Legal
Services Authority. The accident has taken place in the year
2022. Hence, the notional income of the petitioner is
57 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
considered as Rs.15,500/- per month and the annual
income of the petitioner as Rs.1,86,000/-.
b) As per the ratio laid down in the case of Sarla
Verma and others V/s Delhi Transport Corporation and
another, reported in 2009 ACJ 1298, the appropriate
multiplier for a person whose is aged about 52 years is 11.
Therefore, loss of future income is Total annual income X
disability/100 X multiplier = Rs.1,86,000 X 12/100 X 11 =
Rs.2,45,520/-.
ii) Medical expenses: The petitioner has deposed
that, she has incurred expenses of Rs.60,000/- towards
medical, conveyance, food & nourishment, attendant
charges and other incidental charge. In order to prove the
same, she has produced 26 medical bills, as per Ex.P.33. All
the bills have been examined carefully and found that the
petitioner has wrongly calculated the total amount. Actually
the petitioner has spent total amount of Rs.39,278/-
towards medical expenses. Therefore, the petitioner is
58 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
entitled for Rs.39,278/- under the head of medical
expenses.
iii) Pain and sufferings: In the present case the
petitioner has sustained grievous injuries i.e., compression
fracture of L1, D2, D3 and D4 vertebra and for the said
injuries the petitioner has taken conservative treatment. As
per Ex.P.31 discharge summary, the petitioner has taken
treatment as in-patient for 6 days, from 13-08-2022 to 18-
08-2022, in KIMS Hospital and Research Centre, Bengaluru.
Further, as per P.W.8 the said injuries have caused physical
disability to the petitioner. In such circumstances, certainly
the petitioner would have suffered pain and sufferings.
Therefore, taking into consideration the injury sustained
and the disability suffered by the petitioner, this Court is of
the opinion that, compensation amount of Rs.60,000/- is to
be awarded to the petitioner towards pain and sufferings.
iv) Attendant charges: As per Ex.P.31 discharge
summary, the petitioner has taken treatment as in-patient
59 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
for 6 days in KIMS Hospital and Research Centre,
Bengaluru. She might have spent considerable amount
towards attendant charges during that period. Therefore,
compensation of Rs.1000 x 6 = Rs.6,000/- is awarded
towards the attendant charges.
v) Food and nourishment: As per Ex.P.31
discharge summary, the petitioner has taken treatment as
in-patient for 6 days in KIMS Hospital and Research Centre,
Bengaluru. She might have spent considerable amount for
food and nourishment during that period. Therefore,
compensation of Rs.800 x 6 = Rs.4,800/- is awarded towards
food and nourishment charges.
vi) Conveyance expenses: The petitioner is the
resident of near PES College, BSK 1st Stage, 2nd Block,
Bengaluru, the accident has taken place on Bagepalli-
Chikkaballapura NH-44 road, near Reddygollavarihalli
Cross, Chikkaballapura Taluk and District and she has taken
treatment at KIMS Hospital and Research Centre,
60 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
Bengaluru. Taking into consideration the distance in
between the place of accident and the above hospitals,
compensation of Rs.10,000/- is awarded towards
conveyance.
vii) Loss of income during treatment period: The
petitioner has taken treatment for 6 days as in-patient at
KIMS Hospital and Research Centre, Bengaluru, for the
grievous injuries sustained by her. She might have taken
rest for about 2 months and lost her income for the said
period. Therefore, Rs.15,500 x 2 = Rs.31,000/- is awarded
towards loss of income during treatment period.
viii) Loss of amenities: It is evident from the
documents placed on record that, as on the date of accident
the age of the petitioner was 52 years and unfortunately
she has sustained compression fracture of L1, D2, D3 and
D4 vertebra. The evidence shows that, she has suffered
permanent disability to the extent of 12% to the whole
61 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
body. Therefore, awarding compensation of Rs.40,000/-
towards loss of amenities would be just and reasonable.
ix) Future medical expenses: The petitioner has
neither adduced any evidence nor produced any document
to show that, she requires any further treatment for the
injury sustained in the accident. Further, the P.W.8 has not
stated anything with regard to further treatment of the
petitioner. In such circumstances, the question of awarding
compensation for future medical expenses does not arise at
all. Therefore, no compensation is awarded under this
particular head.
23. Accordingly, the petitioner is entitled for
compensation under different heads as follows :
1. Loss of future income Rs. 2,45,520-00
2. Medical expenses 39,278-00
3. Pain and sufferings 60,000-00
4. Attendant charges 6,000-00
5. Food and nourishment 4,800-00
6. Conveyance expenses 10,000-00
7. Loss of income during 31,000-00
62 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
treatment period
8. Loss of amenities 40,000-00
9. Future medical expenses Nil
Total Rs. 4,36,598-00
In all, the petitioner is entitled for compensation of
Rs.4,36,598/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum,
from the date of petition till its realization.
24. Issue No.2 in MVC No.506/2023: While answering the
above issue this Court has come to conclusion that, the
petitioners have successfully proved that, the accident has
taken place due to rash and negligent driving of the drivers
of the Innova car bearing No.KA-41-P-0333 and lorry
bearing No.KA-67-0140 and the deceased Tilak Venkatesh @
Thilak Venkatesh has succumbed to grievous injuries
sustained in the said accident. Now the petitioners are
required to establish that, they are the legal representatives
of the deceased. In this regard, they have produced driving
licence of deceased Tilak Venkatesh @ Thilak Venkatesh
63 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
and their respective Aadhar cards, which are marked as
Ex.P.35 to 37. The said documents clearly goes to show that,
the petitioners No.1 and 2 are the parents of deceased Tilak
Venkatesh @ Thilak Venkatesh. On the other hand, the
relationship of the petitioners with the deceased Tilak
Venkatesh @ Thilak Venkatesh is not specifically denied by
the respondents in the case and even there is no contrary
evidence placed on record with respect to same. In such
circumstances, there is no impediment to believe the above
documents produced by the petitioners and hold that, the
petitioners are the legal representatives of deceased Tilak
Venkatesh @ Thilak Venkatesh.
25. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of National
Insurance Co. V/s Birender, reported in (2020) 11 SCC 356,
has clearly held that,
"The legal representatives of the
deceased could move application for
compensation by virtue of clause (c) of Section
166(1). The major married son who is also
64 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
earning and not fully dependant on the
deceased, would be still covered by the
expression "legal representative" of the
deceased. This Court in Manjuri Bera (supra)
had expounded that liability to pay
compensation under the Act does not cease
because of absence of dependency of the
concerned legal representative. Notably, the
expression "legal representative" has not been
defined in the Act.
The Tribunal has a duty to make an
award, determine the amount of
compensation which is just and proper and
specify the person or persons to whom such
compensation would be paid. The latter part
relates to the entitlement of compensation by
a person who claims for the same.
It is thus settled by now that the legal
representatives of the deceased have a right to
apply for compensation. Having said that, it
must necessarily follow that even the major
married and earning sons of the deceased
being legal representatives have a right to
apply for compensation and it would be the
bounden duty of the Tribunal to consider the
application irrespective of the fact whether the
concerned legal representative was fully
dependent on the deceased and not to limit
the claim towards conventional heads only."
26. According to the ratio laid down in above decision,
the legal representatives though not fully dependent on the
deceased are entitled to claim compensation under all the
65 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
heads i.e., under both conventional and non-conventional
heads. In order to determine the compensation, the age,
avocation, income, dependency, future prospects of the
deceased and other conventional heads are to be
ascertained.
27. The compensation towards loss of dependency:
The oral and documentary evidence placed on record
by the petitioners clearly establishes that, the petitioners
being the parents of deceased Tilak Venkatesh @ Thilak
Venkatesh are the legal representatives of the deceased
and they were depending on him. The dependency does
not only mean financial dependency. Even if the
dependency is a relevant criterion to claim compensation
for loss of dependency, it does not mean financial
dependency is the 'ark of the covenant'. Dependency
includes gratuitous service dependency, physical
dependency, emotional dependency and psychological
dependency. Hence, this Court is of the opinion that, all the
66 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
petitioners are entitled for compensation under the head of
loss of dependency. In order to calculate the loss of
dependency, the first step is to determine the age and
income of the deceased.
i) Age and income of the deceased: The
petitioners have averred that, the age of deceased as on the
date of accident was 27 years. To substantiate the same, the
petitioners have produced the driving licence of deceased
Tilak Venkatesh @ Thilak Venkatesh, which is marked as
Ex.P.35, wherein his date of birth is mentioned as 08-07-
1995. Admittedly, the accident has occurred on 11-08-2022.
This clearly goes to show that, as on the date of accident
the age of the deceased was 27 years. The petitioners have
asserted that, as on the date of accident the deceased was
hale and healthy and he was working as Business Analyst in
Trigensoft Solutions (P) Ltd., Bengaluru and was earning a
sum of Rs.40,000/- per month. To substantiate the same,
they have produced appointment letter of deceased along
67 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
with salary structure, annexure-I, HDFC Bank accounts
statement, pay slip of July-2022, Bachelor of Engineering
Convocation Certificate, MBA marks cards, letter of indent
dated 11-05-2022, offer letter dated 16-05-2022, annexure-
I/salary structure, salary slips (total 3), articles of association
and Form No.1 certificate of incorporation and certificate
under Section 63 of BSA, which are marked as Ex.P.38 to 42
and 53 to 58. Further, they have also examined the
authorised person/HR Director of Trigensoft Solutions (P)
Ltd., Bengaluru as P.W.6 to prove the avocation and income
of the deceased. The P.W.6 has clearly deposed in his
evidence that, the deceased Tilak Venkatesh @ Thilak
Venkatesh was working in their company as business
analyst from 16-05-2022 and he was drawing salary of
Rs.4,80,800/- per annum. Further, as per the Ex.P.40 and 56
pay slips (total 4), for the month of July-2022, the gross
salary of the deceased is Rs.40,500/- per month. After
deducting professional tax of Rs.200/- per month, the net
68 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
salary of the deceased will be Rs.40,300/- per month.
Therefore, the income of the deceased as on the date of
accident, is held at Rs.4,83,600/- per annum.
ii) As per the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court, in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd.,
V/s Pranay Sethi and others, reported in (2017) 16 SCC
680, the legal heirs of deceased are also entitled for future
prospects of the deceased, though he was not a permanent
employee, as on the date of death. Since the deceased was
aged about 27 years and was not a permanent employee,
the future prospects would be 40% of her income, which
comes to Rs.1,93,440/-. Therefore, the future prospects of
the deceased is held as Rs.1,93,440/-. If this income is
added to the notional income, then it comes to
Rs.6,77,040/-. Further, the annual income of the deceased
comes within the exemption limits as per Income Tax Act.
iii) The deduction of personal expenses and
calculating the multiplier: The family of the deceased
69 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
consist of two persons i.e., petitioners No.1 and 2. The total
number of the dependents of the deceased are two and
admittedly the deceased has died bachelor. Therefore,
deduction towards the personal expenses of deceased is
taken as 50% of the total income, which comes to
Rs.3,38,520/-. After deducting 50% out of total income,
towards the personal expenses of deceased, the annual
income of the deceased is held as Rs.3,38,520/-.
iv) As on the date of death, the age of the
deceased was 27 years. As per the guidelines laid down by
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of, Sarla Verma and
others V/s Delhi Transport Corporation and another,
reported in 2009 ACJ 1298 S.C., the appropriate multiplier in
the present case is taken as 17. Accordingly, the
compensation to be paid under the head of loss of
dependency is held at Rs.3,38,520/- x 17 = Rs.57,54,840/-.
v) Compensation under conventional heads: In
the present case, admittedly the petitioners No.1 and 2 are
70 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
parents of deceased Tilak Venkatesh @ Thilak Venkatesh.
Hence, the petitioners No.1 and 2 are entitled for
compensation under the head of filial consortium. As per
the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. V/s Pranay Sethi
and others, reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680, the
compensation under the following conventional heads is
awarded:
a) Loss of estate - Rs. 15,000/-
b) Loss of consortium - Rs. 40,000/-
c) Funeral expenses - Rs. 15,000/-
The compensation under above heads has to be
enhanced 10% for every 3 years. Seven years have been
lapsed from the date of the judgment. Therefore, the
compensation under the above conventional heads is
enhanced by 20%, the loss of estate comes to Rs.18,000/-,
the loss of filial consortium comes to Rs.48,000/- each to
71 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
petitioners No.1 and 2 and funeral expenses comes to
Rs.18,000/-.
28. While answering Issue No.1, for the reasons stated
therein, this Court has come to conclusion that, there is
equal contributory negligence on the part of the deceased
and driver of the lorry in the cause of accident. As such, the
petitioners are entitled for only 50% out of total
compensation amount, under different heads as follows:
Sl. Head of
Amount/Rs
No. Compensation
1. Loss of dependency Rs. 57,54,840-00
2. Loss of filial consortium Rs. 96,000-00
3. Loss of estate Rs. 18,000-00
4. Funeral expenses Rs. 18,000-00
Total Rs. 58,86,840-00
50% of total Rs. 29,43,420-00
Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion
that, the petitioners are entitled for compensation of
Rs.29,43,420/-, with interest at the rate of 6% per annum,
from the date of petition till its realization.
72 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
29. Issue No.2 in MVC No.736/2023: While answering the
above issue this Court has come to conclusion that, the
petitioner has successfully proved that, the accident has
taken place due to rash and negligent driving of the drivers
of the Innova car bearing No.KA-41-P-0333 and lorry
bearing No.KA-67-0140 and she has sustained grievous
injuries in the said accident. As per the medical records
placed on record by the petitioner, she has sustained
compression fracture of L1, D2, D3 and D4 vertebra.
Therefore, this Court is of the further opinion that, the
petitioner is entitled for compensation under various heads.
The damages are to be assessed under two heads i.e.
pecuniary damages, such as medical treatment, attendants,
transport, actual loss of earning, future loss of earning etc.,
and non-pecuniary damages, such as mental and physical
shock, loss of amenities, loss of expectation of life, loss of
prospects of marriage etc. The petitioner is entitled for
compensation under the following heads:
73 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
i) Towards loss of future income: In order to
determine the compensation towards loss of future income,
the age, monthly income and disability of the petitioner are
to be determined. To prove her age, the petitioner has
produced the notarised copy of her Aadhar card, which is
marked as Ex.P.45. As per Ex.P.45, the date of birth of the
petitioner is 06-04-1979. The accident has taken place on
11-08-2022 at about 1.45 P.M. This clearly goes to show
that, the age of the petitioner as on the date of accident
was 43 years. Further, the P.W.7, who is the doctor, who has
examined the petitioner for the purpose of assessment of
disability, has clearly deposed in his examination-in-chief
affidavit that, on clinical examination he found that, the
petitioner has sustained 1) depressed fracture of fronto
parietal bone with indentation on brain parenchyma, 2) cut
lacerated wound measuring 8x2 cms., over scalp left fronto
parietal region, 3) left eye contusion injury, 4) comminuted
supracondylar fracture right humerus with wrist drop and
74 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
5) fracture of lamina of C6 vertebra right side and for the
said injuries the petitioner has undergone surgery. Further
he has deposed that, on clinical and radiological
examination of injuries suffered by the petitioner he found
that, the petitioner has suffered permanent physical
disability of 60% to the right upper limb and 18% to the
whole body. The Ex.P.43 wound certificate, Ex.P.59
outpatient records, Ex.P.60 inpatient medical records and
Ex.P.61 x-ray film also clearly speaks that, the petitioner has
suffered the above stated injuries and for the said injuries
she has undergone surgery. Though, the learned counsel
for respondent No.3 and 6 have cross-examined P.W.7 in
length, nothing worth has been elicited from his mouth
which creates doubt on the veracity of his evidence. He has
clearly denied the suggestions made to him that, the
petitioner has not suffered any disability and he has
exaggerated the percentage of disability. Further it is
pertinent to note that, the P.W.7 has deposed in his
75 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
evidence that, the accident has occurred on 11-08-2022 and
he has assessed the disability to the petitioner on 13-03-
2024, which is after lapse of one year and seven months
from the date of injuries caused to the petitioner. Further
he has admitted that, the fractures are united and implants
are not removed, he has assessed only physical disability
and the petitioner has not used her body parts, resulting in
weakness and loss of wrist muscles. Therefore, in such
circumstances and taking into consideration the age of the
petitioner, injuries sustained, avocation of the petitioner,
duration of treatment and oral and documentary evidence
on record, this Court is of the opinion that, considering the
disability of 15% to the whole body of the petitioner would
be justified. Hence, in the instant case the disability of 15%
to the whole body of the petitioner is considered.
a) The petitioner has deposed in her evidence that,
before accident she was working as home maker/house
keeping and earning a sum of Rs.25,000/- per month.
76 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
Further she has deposed that, due to grievous injuries
suffered in the said accident she is unable to do her work.
The respondents have specifically denied the same. In such
circumstances, the burden was on the petitioner to prove
her avocation and income. But, the petitioner has failed to
establish the same through cogent and corroborative
evidence. She has not produced any document to show
that, before accident she was working as home
maker/house keeping and earning a sum of Rs.25,000/- per
month. Therefore, in such circumstances, there is no other
option before this Court, except to consider the notional
income as per the guidelines of the Karnataka State Legal
Services Authority. The accident has taken place in the year
2022. Hence, the notional income of the petitioner is
considered as Rs.15,500/- per month and the annual
income of the petitioner as Rs.1,86,000/-.
b) As per the ratio laid down in the case of Sarla
Verma and others V/s Delhi Transport Corporation and
77 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
another, reported in 2009 ACJ 1298, the appropriate
multiplier for a person whose is aged about 43 years is 14.
Therefore, loss of future income is Total annual income X
disability/100 X multiplier = Rs.1,86,000 X 15/100 X 14 =
Rs.3,90,600/-.
ii) Medical expenses: The petitioner has deposed
that, she has incurred expenses of Rs.70,000/- towards
medical, conveyance, food & nourishment, attendant
charges and other incidental charge. In order to prove the
same, she has produced 9 medical bills, as per Ex.P.44. All
the bills have been examined carefully and found that the
bill at serial No.1 is xerox bill. Therefore, the said bill is not
taken into consideration. Hence, the petitioner is entitled
for Rs.4,377/- under the head of medical expenses.
iii) Pain and sufferings: In the present case the
petitioner has sustained grievous injuries i.e., 1) depressed
fracture of fronto parietal bone with indentation on brain
parenchyma, 2) cut lacerated wound measuring 8x2 cms.,
78 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
over scalp left fronto parietal region, 3) left eye contusion
injury, 4) comminuted supracondylar fracture right
humerus with wrist drop and 5) fracture of lamina of C6
vertebra right side and for the said injuries the petitioner
has undergone surgery. As per Ex.P.60 inpatient record, the
petitioner has taken treatment as in-patient for 8 days, from
12-08-2022 to 19-08-2022, in KIMS Hospital and Research
Centre, Bengaluru. She has also undergone surgery.
Further, as per P.W.7 the said injuries have caused physical
disability to the petitioner. In such circumstances, certainly
the petitioner would have suffered pain and sufferings.
Therefore, taking into consideration the injury sustained
and the disability suffered by the petitioner, this Court is of
the opinion that, compensation amount of Rs.80,000/- is to
be awarded to the petitioner towards pain and sufferings.
iv) Attendant charges: As per Ex.P.60 inpatient
record, the petitioner has taken treatment as in-patient for
8 days in KIMS Hospital and Research Centre, Bengaluru.
79 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
She might have spent considerable amount towards
attendant charges during that period. Therefore,
compensation of Rs.1000 x 8 = Rs.8,000/- is awarded
towards the attendant charges.
v) Food and nourishment: As per Ex.P.60
inpatient record, the petitioner has taken treatment as in-
patient for 8 days in KIMS Hospital and Research Centre,
Bengaluru. She might have spent considerable amount for
food and nourishment during that period. Therefore,
compensation of Rs.800 x 8 = Rs.6,400/- is awarded towards
food and nourishment charges.
vi) Conveyance expenses: The petitioner is the
resident of Narasapura road, Bidaraguppe, Anekal,
Bengaluru, the accident has taken place on Bagepalli-
Chikkaballapura NH-44 road, near Reddygollavarihalli
Cross, Chikkaballapura Taluk and District and she has taken
treatment at KIMS Hospital and Research Centre,
Bengaluru. Taking into consideration the distance in
80 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
between the place of accident and the above hospitals,
compensation of Rs.10,000/- is awarded towards
conveyance.
vii) Loss of income during treatment period: The
petitioner has taken treatment for 8 days as in-patient at
KIMS Hospital and Research Centre, Bengaluru, for the
grievous injuries sustained by her. She might have taken
rest for about 2 months and lost her income for the said
period. Therefore, Rs.15,500 x 2 = Rs.31,000/- is awarded
towards loss of income during treatment period.
viii) Loss of amenities: It is evident from the
documents placed on record that, as on the date of accident
the age of the petitioner was 43 years and unfortunately
she has sustained 1) depressed fracture of fronto parietal
bone with indentation on brain parenchyma, 2) cut
lacerated wound measuring 8x2 cms., over scalp left fronto
parietal region, 3) left eye contusion injury, 4) comminuted
supracondylar fracture right humerus with wrist drop and
81 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
5) fracture of lamina of C6 vertebra right side. The evidence
shows that, she has suffered permanent disability to the
extent of 15% to the whole body. Therefore, awarding
compensation of Rs.50,000/- towards loss of amenities
would be just and reasonable.
ix) Future medical expenses: The petitioner has
deposed in her evidence that, she needs to undergo one
more surgery for removal of implants, which would cost
around Rs.50,000/-. To substantiate the same, she has
produced doctor's certificate regarding cost of future
operation, which is marked as Ex.P.46. From this document
it is clear that, the petitioner needs to undergo one more
surgery for removal of implants, which would cost around
Rs.45,000/- to Rs.50,000/-. Therefore, this Court is of the
opinion that, awarding compensation of Rs.20,000/-
towards future medical expenses would be just and
reasonable.
82 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
30. Accordingly, the petitioner is entitled for
compensation under different heads as follows :
1. Loss of future income Rs. 3,90,600-00
2. Medical expenses 4,377-00
3. Pain and sufferings 80,000-00
4. Attendant charges 8,000-00
5. Food and nourishment 6,400-00
6. Conveyance expenses 10,000-00
7. Loss of income during 31,000-00
treatment period
8. Loss of amenities 50,000-00
9. Future medical expenses 20,000-00
Total Rs. 6,00,377-00
In all, the petitioner is entitled for compensation of
Rs.6,00,377/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum
(excluding interest on future medical expenses of
Rs.20,000/-), from the date of petition till its realization.
31. Issue No.2 in MVC No.737/2023: While answering the
above issue this Court has come to conclusion that, the
petitioner has successfully proved that, the accident has
taken place due to rash and negligent driving of the drivers
83 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
of the Innova car bearing No.KA-41-P-0333 and lorry
bearing No.KA-67-0140 and he has sustained simple injuries
in the said accident. The petitioner has sustained cut
lacerated wound 3x1cm over right forearm and abrasion
over right forearm. Therefore, this Court is of the further
opinion that, the petitioner is entitled for compensation
under various heads. The damages are to be assessed
under two heads i.e. pecuniary damages, such as medical
treatment, attendants, transport, actual loss of earning,
future loss of earning etc., and non-pecuniary damages,
such as mental and physical shock, loss of amenities, loss of
expectation of life, loss of prospects of marriage etc. But,
there is absolutely no evidence placed on record by the
petitioner to show that, he has suffered any disability or
deformity due to above injuries. The petitioner has neither
examined any doctor, nor he has produced any document
for the purpose of assessing the above pecuniary and non-
pecuniary damages. In such circumstances, there is no
84 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
other option before this Court, except to award global
compensation in general.
32. As per Ex.P.47 wound certificate, the petitioner has
sustained cut lacerated wound 3x1 cm over right forearm
and abrasion over right forearm. The above said injuries are
simple in nature. As per Ex.P.48 OPD card of KIMS Hospital
and Ex.P.49 outpatient treatment slip of KIMS Hospital, the
petitioner has taken treatment as an outpatient in KIMS
Hospital, Bengaluru. The petitioner has deposed that, he
has spent Rs.10,000/- towards medicine, conveyance,
attendant charges and nourishment. In order to prove the
same, he has produced one medical bill, as per Ex.P.50. The
said bill has been examined carefully and found that the
petitioner has spent total amount of Rs.400/- towards
medical expenses. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled for
Rs.400/- under the head of medical expenses.
33. Further, the petitioner has deposed in his evidence
that, earlier to the accident he was working as Analyst and
85 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
A4 in Capgemini Technology Services India Ltd., Bengaluru
and earning a sum of Rs.29,878/- per month and due to the
accidental injuries he has become permanently disabled
and thereby lost his earning capacity. But, the petitioner
has failed to prove the same. The petitioner has neither
examined the doctor, nor he has produced any document
to show that, he has suffered any permanent physical
disability or deformity due to injuries sustained in the
accident. No doubt, due to above injuries the petitioner
might have suffered some pain and sufferings and the
same would have been nourished with medicines,
nutritious food and he might have spent some money for
conveyance. In such circumstances, taking into
consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and
the injuries caused to the petitioner and treatment taken by
him, this Court is of the opinion that, some suitable
compensation is required to be awarded to the petitioner.
Accordingly, it is held that, awarding compensation of
86 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
Rs.40,000/- to the petitioner, including medical expenses,
would meet the ends of justice.
34. Liability: Admittedly, as on the date of accident, in
MVC No.786/2023 the respondent No.1 is the owner and
respondent No.2 is the insurer of the offending Innova car
bearing No.KA-41-P-0333. In MVC No.505/2023, MVC
No.736/2023 and MVC No.737/2023 the respondent No.5 is
the owner and respondent No.6 is the insurer of the
offending Innova car bearing No.KA-41-P-0333. Further, as
per the certified copy of reply given by the owner of
offending vehicle, to the notice issued by the investigation
officer under Sec.133 of Motor Vehicles Act, which is
marked as Ex.P.9, the driver of offending vehicle by name
Tilak Venkatesh S/o Venkatesh was holding valid and
effective driving licence bearing No.KA4120130012665 to
drive the said vehicle and it is valid from 21-08-2019 to 03-
09-2033. The policy issued by the insurer bearing No.1-
2287GDPOP400, policy No.ML800145, in respect of
87 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
offending Innova car, was valid from 06-10-2021 to 05-10-
2022. As such, the insurance policy issued by the insurer in
respect of offending vehicle was valid as on the date of
accident i.e. 11-08-2022. There is no evidence on record to
show that, there is breach of any terms and conditions of
the insurance policy issued by the insurer. Further as on the
date of accident, in MVC No.786/2023 the respondent No.3
is the owner and respondent No.4 is the insurer of the
offending lorry bearing No.KA-67-0140. In MVC
No.505/2023, MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 and
MVC No.737/2023 the respondent No.2 is the owner and
respondent No.3 is the insurer of the offending lorry
bearing No.KA-67-0140. Further, as per the certified copy of
reply given by the owner of offending vehicle, to the notice
issued by the investigation officer under Sec.133 of Motor
Vehicles Act, which is marked as Ex.P.11, the driver of
offending vehicle by name Mubarak S/o Syed Basheer was
holding valid and effective driving licence bearing
88 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
No.KA4020150008994 to drive the said vehicle and it is valid
from 04-10-2021 to 03-10-2026. The policy issued by the
insurer bearing No.VGC077965700100, in respect of
offending lorry, was valid from 03-01-2022 to 02-01-2023. As
such, the insurance policy issued by the insurer in respect
of offending vehicle was valid as on the date of accident i.e.
11-08-2022. There is no evidence on record to show that,
there is breach of any terms and conditions of the
insurance policy issued by the insurer. Further, the evidence
placed on record by the petitioners clearly establishes that,
due to rash and negligent driving of the drivers of the
Innova car bearing No.KA-41-P-0333 and lorry bearing
No.KA-67-0140 the accident in question has occurred and
the petitioners in M.V.C. No.786/2023, MVC No.505/2023,
MVC No.736/2023 and MVC No.737/2023 have sustained
injuries and deceased Tilak Venkatesh @ Thilak Venkatesh
in M.V.C. No.506/2023 has succumbed to grievous injuries
sustained in the said accident. In such circumstances, the
89 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
owners of said vehicles are vicariously liable to compensate
for the damage caused by the usage of said vehicles. The
insurers of the vehicles have to indemnify the owners.
Therefore, the owners and insurers are jointly and severally
liable to pay the compensation to the petitioners. However,
the primary liability is on the insurers to pay the
compensation to the petitioners. Therefore, for the above
stated reasons, holding that, the petitioner in MVC
No.786/2023 is entitled for compensation of Rs.4,21,537/-
from the respondents No.2 and 4 equally. The petitioners in
MVC No.505/2023 is entitled for compensation of
Rs.4,36,598/-, MVC No.736/2023 is entitled for
compensation of Rs.6,00,377/- and MVC No.737/2023 is
entitled for compensation of Rs.40,000/-, from the
respondents No.3 and 6 equally. The petitioners in MVC
No.506/2023 are entitled for compensation of
Rs.29,43,420/-, from the respondent No.3. In all the
petitions, the petitioners are entitled for interest at the rate
90 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 &
MVC No.737/2023
of 6% per annum, from the date of petition till its
realization, I answer Issue No.2 in all the cases Partly
Affirmative.
35. Issue No.3: In view of the above findings, I proceed to
pass the following order:
ORDER
The petitions are partly allowed with costs.
The petitioner in MVC No.786/2023 is entitled to compensation of Rs.4,21,537/- (Rupees four lakh twenty one thousand five hundred and thirty seven only), with interest at the rate of 6% p.a., from the date of petition till realisation.
The petitioner in MVC No.505/2023 is entitled to compensation of Rs.4,36,598/- (Rupees four lakh thirty six thousand five hundred and ninety eight only), with interest at the rate of 6% 91 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023 MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 & MVC No.737/2023 p.a., from the date of petition till realisation.
The petitioners in MVC No.506/2023 are entitled to compensation of Rs.29,43,420/- (Rupees twenty nine lakh forty three thousand four hundred and twenty only), with interest at the rate of 6% p.a., from the date of petition till realisation.
The petitioner in MVC No.736/2023 is entitled to compensation of Rs.6,00,377/- (Rupees six lakh three hundred and seventy seven only), with interest at the rate of 6% p.a., (excluding interest on future medical expenses of Rs.20,000/-) from the date of petition till realisation.
The petitioner in MVC No.737/2023 is entitled to compensation of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees forty thousand only), with interest at the rate of 6% p.a., from the date of petition till realisation.
92 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 & MVC No.737/2023 The respondents No.1 to 4 in MVC No.786/2023 are jointly and severally liable to pay the above compensation amount to the petitioner. However, the primary liability to pay the compensation amount is fastened on respondents No.2 and 4 - Insurance Companies equally and they are directed to pay the said amount to the petitioner within two months from the date of this order.
The respondents No.2, 3, 5 and 6 in MVC No.505/2023, MVC No.736/2023 and MVC No.737/2023 are jointly and severally liable to pay the above compensation amount to the petitioners. However, the primary liability to pay the compensation amount is fastened on respondents No.3 and 6 - Insurance Companies equally and they are directed to pay the said amount to the petitioners within two months from the date of this order. 93 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 & MVC No.737/2023 The respondents No.2 and 3 in MVC No.506/2023 are jointly and severally liable to pay the above compensation amount to the petitioners. However, the primary liability to pay the compensation amount is fastened on respondent No.3 - Insurance Company and it is directed to pay the said amount to the petitioners within two months from the date of this order.
The entire compensation amount awarded to petitioners in MVC No.786/2023, MVC No.505/2023, MVC No.736/2023 and MVC No.737/2023, shall be released in favour of the petitioners through e-payment on proper identification and verification.
The compensation amount in M.V.C. No.506/2023 is apportioned as follows:
Petitioner No.1 - Mother - 50% Petitioner No.2 - Father - 50% Out of total compensation amount awarded in favour of petitioners No.1 94 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023 MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 & MVC No.737/2023 and 2 in M.V.C. No.506/2023, 30% of the compensation amount with proportionate interest shall be deposited in their names as fixed deposit in any nationalized bank for the period of three years with liberty to draw the accrued interest periodically and the remaining 70% amount with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of the petitioners No.1 and 2 through e-payment on proper identification and verification.
Advocate's fee is fixed at Rs.2,000/- each in all the cases.
Draw award accordingly in all the cases.
A copy of this judgment shall be kept in file of MVC No.505/2023, MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 and MVC No.737/2023.
(Dictated to the stenographer, directly on computer, typed by him, corrected and then pronounced in the open court this the 24 th day of January, 2026) (Mohammed Yunus Athani) Member, MACT, Bengaluru.95 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023
MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 & MVC No.737/2023 ANNEXURE Witnesses examined on behalf of petitioners:
P.W.1: Rekha R. D/o Ramesh S. P.W.2: Rajanna S.K. S/o Krishnappa S. P.W.3: Rathna K.S. W/o S. Venkatesha P.W.4: Manjula P.N. @ Manjula W/o Gurunath S. P.W.5: Subash K.B. @ Subash B. S/o Babureddy K.S P.W.6: Parimal Kumar S/o Randhir Kumar P.W.7: Dr. R. Yatish S/o Late Ramalingaiah P.W.8: Dr. Somashekar P.W.9: K. Venkatesh S/o Kanan Documents marked on behalf of petitioners:
Ex.P.1: Certified copy of F.I.R. Ex.P.2: Certified copy of First Information Statement.
Ex.P.3: Certified copy of Spot Mahazar Ex.P.4: Certified copy of Spot Sketch Ex.P.5: Certified copy of M.V.A. Report Ex.P.6: Certified copy of Wound Certificate Ex.P.7: Certified copy of Charge-sheet Ex.P.8 to 11: Certified copy of Notice and reply to said Notice under Section 133 of Motor Vehicles Act Ex.P.12 & Discharge Summaries (total 2) 13:
Ex.P.14: Medical Bills (total 20) 96 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023 MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 & MVC No.737/2023 Ex.P.15: Medical Prescriptions Ex.P.16: Notarized copy of Marks Cards of petitioner (total 7) Ex.P.17: Notarized copy of Degree Certificate Ex.P.18: Appointment Letter of petitioner Ex.P.19: Notarized copy of Identity Card of petitioner Ex.P.20: Notarized copy of PAN Card Ex.P.21: Notarized copy of Aadhar Card Ex.P.22: Scan Films Ex.P.23: Pay Slips Ex.P.24: Discharge Summary of NIMHANS Hospital Ex.P.25: Authorization Letter Ex.P.26: Case Sheet Ex.P.27: Certified copy of Order Sheet in Crime No.162/2022 Ex.P.28: Certified copy of Insurance Policy of Vehicle bearing Reg. No.KA-67-0140 Ex.P.29: Certified copy of Wound Certificate Ex.P.30: Outpatient Booklet of Victoria Hospital Ex.P.31: Discharge Summary of KIMS Hospital Ex.P.32: Medical Certified issued by KIMS Hospital Ex.P.33: Medical Bills (total 26) Ex.P.34: Certified copy of Post-mortem Report of deceased Tilak Venkatesh Ex.P.35: Certified copy of Driving Licence of deceased Tilak Venkatesh Ex.P.36: Notarized copy of Aadhar Card of P.W.3 Ex.P.37: Notarized copy of Aadhar Card of 97 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023 MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 & MVC No.737/2023 husband of P.W.3 Ex.P.38: Appointment Letter of deceased Tilak Venkatesh along with salary structure, Amnexure-I Ex.P.39: HDFC Bank Accounts Statement of deceased Tilak Venkatesh Ex.P.40: Pay Slip of July 2022 of deceased Tilak Venkatesh Ex.P.41: Bachelor of Engineering Convocation Certificate of deceased Tilak Venkatesh Ex.P.42: MBA Marks Cards of deceased Tilak Venkatesh Ex.P.43: Certified copy of Wound Certificate Ex.P.44: Medical Bills (total 9) Ex.P.45: Notarized copy of Aadhar Card Ex.P.46: Doctor's Certificate regarding cost of future operation Ex.P.47: Certified copy of Wound Certificate Ex.P.48: OPD Card of KIMS Hospital Ex.P.49: Outpatient Treatment Slip of KIMS Hospital Ex.P.50: Medical Bill Ex.P.51: Notarized copy of Aadhar Card Ex.P.52: Authorization Letter Ex.P.53: Letter of Intent dated 11-05-2022 Ex.P.54: Offer Letter dated 16-05-2022 Ex.P.55: Annexure-I/Salary Structure Ex.P.56: Salary Slips (total 3) Ex.P.57: Articles of Association and Form No.1 Certificate of Incorporation Ex.P.58: Certificate under Section 63 of BSA 98 MVC No.786/2023 C/w MVC No.505/2023 MVC No.506/2023, MVC No.736/2023 & MVC No.737/2023 Ex.P.59: Out-patient Records Ex.P.60: In-patient Medical Records Ex.P.61: X-ray Film Ex.P.62: In-patient Records Ex.P.63: Out-patient Slip Ex.P.64: Recent X-ray Film Ex.P.65: MRI Reports (total 11) Ex.P.66: Authorization Letter Ex.P.67: Case Sheet Witnesses examined on behalf of respondents:
R.W.1: Likith K.C. S/o Chidananda K.P. R.W.2: Sudhakara H. S/o Hanumappa T. Documents marked on behalf of the respondents:
Ex.R.1: Authorization Letter Ex.R.2: Authorization Letter Ex.R.3: True copy of Insurance Policy (Mohammed Yunus Athani) Member, MACT, Bengaluru.