Karnataka High Court
Sri M C Shivanna vs C T Nagesha on 6 February, 2017
Author: A.S.Bopanna
Bench: A.S.Bopanna
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6th DAY OF FEBRUARY 2017
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S.BOPANNA
WRIT PETITION NOS.48361/2012
& 12771/2013(GM-AC)
BETWEEN :
1. Sri. M.C. Shivanna,
S/o Channaveeregowda,
Aged about 35 Years,
R/At H.Mylanahally Village,
Dudda Hobli,
Hassan Taluk And District.
PIN - 573 101.
2. Sri. Doreswamy,
S/o Ningegowda,
Aged About 45 Years,
R/at H. Mylanahally Village,
Dudda Hobli,
Hassan Taluk and District.
PIN - 573 101. ... PETITIONERS
(By Sri. G. V. Narasimhamurthy, Adv.)
AND :
1. C. T. Nagesha,
S/o Thimmegowda,
Aged about 29 years,
R/At Gidde Gowdara Vatara,
-2-
Opp: Kalyana Mantapa,
Gowri Koppalu,
Hassan 0 573 112
2. The New India Assurance
Company Ltd.,
Rep. by its Branch Manager,
Sri. P.P. Muthappa,
S/o P.P. Palangappa,
Aged about 58 years,
Branch Office,
Chandan Complex,
Harashamahal Road,
Hassan Town-573 102. ... RESPONDENTS
. . . .
These writ petitions are filed under Articles 226
and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to set aside
the order dated 22.3.12 in Misc. Petition No.47/09 and
in Misc. Petition 48/09 passed by the Hon'ble Court of
the Addl. Sr. Civil Judge at Hassan at Annx-F and etc.
These writ petitions coming on for preliminary
hearing in `B' Group, this day, the Court made the
following:
ORDER
The petitioner is before this Court assailing the order dated 22.03.2012 passed in Misc. Petition Nos. 47/2009 & 48/2009 impugned at Annexure `F' to the petition. The petitioner in that light is seeking issue of -3- mandamus to direct the 2nd respondent to pay the compensation as awarded by the Tribunal in MVC Nos. 991/2007 and 992/2007 under the Judgment and Award dated 28.05.2009.
2. The petitioners are the claimants in MVC Nos.991/2007 & 992/2007. At the first instance the Tribunal had passed the judgment and award dated 28.05.2009 whereunder the compensation was awarded and the liability was fixed on the Insurance Company to pay the amount. Subsequently, the Insurance Company filed the review petitions in MVC Petitions No. 47/2009 and 48/2009 seeking exoneration of their liability and to hold the owner of the vehicle to be liable to pay the compensation. The Tribunal by the order dated 22.03.2012 has accepted the contention, allowed the review petition and fastened the liability on the owner of the vehicle by exonerating the Insurance Company. It is against such order the petitioners are before this Court. -4-
3. In a matter relating to the compensation payable and the liability thereto as provided under the Motor Vehicles Act, if the petitioner has any grievance with regard to the Judgment and award passed by the Tribunal including the modification of the Judgment and Award through the Review petition, the petitioners would have to avail the remedy of appeal as provided under Section 173 of the Act.
4. It is also relevant to note that one other claimant in respect of the same accident had filed such an appeal in M.F.A. No.3591/2010 which has been considered and disposed of by this Court through the Judgment dated 03.06.2015. In that light liberty is reserved to the petitioner to file an appeal.
Needless to mention that the petitioner is entitled to seek for consideration of the time spent in prosecuting this petition instead of availing the alternate remedy for seeking condonation of delay. -5-
In terms of the above, petition stands disposed of. Registry is directed to return the papers, if any sought, to the learned counsel for the petitioner to enable him to file the appeal.
Sd/-
JUDGE SPS