Karnataka High Court
Sri. Manjunath H M vs Sri. K. Aswatha on 8 March, 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF MARCH, 2018
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A. PATIL
M.F.A. NO.3020/2016(MV)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI. MANJUNATH H. M.,
S/O G. MUNISWAMY,
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
2. SMT. RAMYA,
W/O MANJUNATH H. M.,
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
BOTH ARE R/AT NO.127
HUSKUR VILLAGE,
WIRGO NAGAR POST
HOSKOTE TALUK,
BENGALURU-562114. ... APPELLANTS
(BY SRI A. S. GIRISH, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI. K. ASWATHA,
MAJOR IN AGE,
R/AT NO.299,
8TH CROSS, JAYANAGAR,
TEKAL ROAD,
KOLAR DISTRICT-563132.
-2-
(OWNER OF LORRY BEARING
NO.KA-07-7013)
2. M/S UNITED INDIA INSURANCE
COMPANY LIMITED,
4TH AND 5TH FLOOR,
KRUSHI BHAVANA,
HUDSON CIRCLE,
BENGALURU-01.
REPTD. BY ITS MANAGER
(OWNER OF LORRY BEARING
NO.KA-07-7013) ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI N. S. SHESHADRI, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI C. SHANKAR REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
******
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF
MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED: 01.10.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.186/2013 ON
THE FILE OF THE 8TH ADDITIONAL DISTRICT &
SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT,
BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM
PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
The present appeal has been preferred by the appellants-claimants assailing the judgment and award dated 1.10.2015 passed in MVC No.186/2013 by the IX -3- Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District.
2. Heard.
3. The appeal is admitted and with the consent of the learned Counsel appearing for the parties, the same is taken up for final disposal.
4. The facts leading to the case are that on 16.2.2013 at about 12.30 p.m., appellant No.2-mother of master Chandan were proceeding in a TVS moped bearing No. KA-51-ED-8960 and when they reached IB Circle, Vivekananda Extension, Hosakote Town, a lorry bearing registration No.KA-07-7013 came rashly and negligently and dashed against the said TVS as a result of which, the 2nd appellant-Ramya and also Master Chandan suffered with injuries. Immediately, they were shifted to MVJ Medical College and Research Hospital, and the doctor opined that Master Chandan has already -4- been dead. For having lost the son, a claim petition came to be filed by the parents.
5. In pursuance of the notice, the respondents appeared and filed their written statement denying the contents of the petition. It was further contended that the alleged accident had not taken place due to rash and negligent act of the driver of lorry but it has taken place due to fault of the rider of the motor cycle and as such, they are not entitled to any compensation. It was further contended that the liability would be subject to terms and conditions of the policy. On these grounds, the respondents sought for dismissal of the said claim petition.
6. In order to prove their case, appellant No.1- claimant No.1 was examined as P.W.1 and got marked Exs.P.1 to P.25. The respondents have not any evidence.
-5-
7. After hearing the parties to the lis, the impugned judgment and award came to be passed and for having not satisfied with the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appellants-claimants are before this Court.
8. The main grounds urged by the learned Counsel for the appellants-claimants are that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side and the same requires to be enhanced.
9. Per contra, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-insurer by justifying the impugned judgment and award prayed to dismiss the appeal.
10. As could be seen from the impugned judgment and award, admittedly the deceased was aged about 3 years and by considering the age of the deceased and applying the principle laid down by the -6- Apex Court in the case of R.K. Malik -vs- Kiran Pal and Others reported in 2009 AIR SCW 4381, the Tribunal has awarded the compensation of Rs.2,25,000/- with 8% interest from the date of petition till the date of realization.
11. At this juncture, both the Counsel on negotiating the matter have agreed for a global compensation of Rs.3,80,000/- without interest.
12. In the light of the amicable settlement arrived at between the parties, the impugned judgment and award dated 1.10.2015 passed in MVC No.186/2013 by the IX Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru is modified holding that the appellants-claimants are entitled to the total compensation of Rs.3,80,000/-.
13. During the course of arguments, it is submitted by the learned Counsel for the respondent- -7- insurance company that already a sum of Rs.2,25,000/- with interest has been paid to the claimants. In that light, the respondent-Insurance Company is directed to pay the remaining balance within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment.
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed.
Sd/-
JUDGE Nsu/-