M/S Oriental Insurance Company Ltd vs Smt Lakshmi Devi S on 6 August, 2010

[Cites 0, Cited by 5]

Karnataka High Court

M/S Oriental Insurance Company Ltd vs Smt Lakshmi Devi S on 6 August, 2010

Bench: L.Narayana Swamy

 "    scams: arm; am

tit

mzmmammmrwmmmraxa AT 

mamn 'rm mm 061% my 03* AIIGIIET, 2919. V  j _

BEFQRE

in amvnm mwmma   V  ' ' 

 

E :

ws. tzxmmzmz. msnmcs co. ::rn.=._ 
T.G.M.A.Br£DZﬁG   --
12¢' E'°1'.+€¥ﬁR, '1'z3"mua~572 1:31 ;

new REFRESEHIEE mrrrs " '
REG~£0ﬁAi.OFFICEEo. H
M!*!&5,RESmEKCY_Ri'3AE   A  %  A
amaaa1.mE-25_-     
was REGIG1f€A3'.--=..Bﬁﬁ_AGEE_   

M' 3m   
PIKE :

1.

nmriﬁ' w/mmm $'E11%3J vmxafmrm @VEI¥KA'mKb'2§...§R' ' . smmsfaag sham _ 'P1tc3m3tml:.1'€1*a;«*;:a' " cU1:%BA?£§_Mm$2*mcT

2. nsvxs , W[G.2A'£E mama? vmmmm so was V' " .. 50943 mi: 3&3?

._ }Mé1*t;.éGam Bmczmw VICE 335% B££IﬁEER£.BAI} '"HYI)EE'ABAD Aﬁiiﬁliﬁa P%%E

4. gm B.x.HAHnAeam §!ﬁ.K.%.R.E 3% mm man $J3I)AGAHGA Kxmsxoszw 'ﬁ ..9 3ﬂWH {BY SE ES'U$Jﬁ'£'A K€3HAI~Z; ABV. FGR R3 R1, @8351} 124- EERVEIZ3} RES?€3HD%'i'8 'rm ma I8 FILED am 1'?3(l] 03 mi ACT ma;z1s**s'_rf.*x__H£.__ azmemraan AWAR1} mun: 29.12.2oo% rassw 1:3; 30.132605 mi mg mg or mm cm; JU'I}GE $'iI,DE7j"Ali'{'_# _ MJDL. mar, C awamanwuab commmnoy 'er ' a:..4,5s,aw;- WITH mmmswg 6% 1%; m:3H'--.m;z~_:'&%m ':32? PE'.E'I"£'I€¥K '£1131. i3AYiTAHB ETC, Tm M.F.A. comma 03 mg axgrgm; mfg' 'Ii_{E ' COURT DEIIIVEREI3 'E3 .-J ' I':

zm apml ia Company challenging the 29.32.2005 passed in the Civil Judga {$22311} on the gvunﬁ of liabﬂitvi aw A judment and award, that:

campexasaﬁon of R3.4,58,CX3{}{.. : {5G'§:'§ﬁ and 56% an tiw Inaurarraca Compaxayj ' " V 31; at &% Fm' amnxm ﬁnm the data of petmo' ' 13. 3, Then are twe vehiolﬁ inmhnad it: try: aeekient am 'ma rmpxt af the whiac& 53% :::f the Iiabﬂity has lawn fastenad. A lorry is fﬁpfﬁﬁﬁiﬂd by the apwllant - 4 .3.

irsauraw mtvmpany am}. etzhsr vehéck: is the; APE-'$R"1'C bus.

4. 1% faarﬁ (So-unsai 59? tbs appeﬂar1t~ V. that am Velma' Ia am nmxved in the awidgn:

whom entim liability slmtﬂed 'I'hou.gh the driva' of the Apsmtfbm is' far 1% whgema but by the Tribunal. On accident, a pawn, baa was an eye. mm' 5 camxams; 13) the police mama" 91$ in km eomplsfmt as " Fm stated by virtue cf the rash aﬂ an the part cf APSRTC bus, the zrradg

5. cf ﬁrm same, mm cszzamel submitmd.

4' 9:: the widmme cf E::.,P.1 axﬁ aha on the bask 51%, tm liabiiity almuld have been faaeaﬂ A»»..41 .:;:::1 the APSRIE. Thm Eorry was parlesd mum; laft aida ofthercachwhicixise' ﬁumﬂiemhamrasper -4- Ex.P.f3. The aspect has not been comide:-ed by the tribu11nl,ifntn]l,thattheparlm:dhuycaul:iben|ade liable cnly m theextnand of2096or zseemi mt Hence, it is submitted to modmr the impugned A' %

6. Lea:-nod Comnel ﬁn' the am ;t % mbmim tltmt on belmﬁ of the dnva" af the bus has been . he was drivim the bus village. the middle of the road w:I1hm.1' 1: m:i'3.':n' ' lamps, he mend' to avert " to the exam left side of the cf doing so, his bus left hand _ hind _ n Oran ' . person who was engaged by the oontraemr ' Ix: operate the iv in the bus ma uusta.und' V V. and resulted in his death. Hence, the learned {loaned uubm5ts that liability on lorry and the bus '3 ﬁxed at 50% each. Heme. appeal ﬂed by the appellant has in be dkmﬁaed.

I5! '?-. I ham hard the

8. '% suiamaian of ' cf the Iimzny" on Inrry % is n'a b3g twain rim: 2:2. arms so the drg,m.- afhrry'§:_ not W $1' * 'W 88 Per mm and the gaauoad may ewidianm Ifxappcmad not bus but an guhziiisaiaan of the appaﬁant ﬁnance}. 'x that aheetad and sztharge sfwct imaeﬁ is mi: slﬁft cm em-e ziabmcy an an APSRTC2 Granada ﬁat' aaqmlar ' { «mm am the mm mm: be mm m ﬁx ﬁrm Isabém rm tbs partaftlw hrry. Inviaw arm tam, c:it-r.:%ta%,ma;w§aEsphﬁbybnt11th:aCo1:me1&r 1

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court