Bangalore District Court
Nagamani vs Shri Ram Gen Ins Co Ltd on 3 February, 2024
1 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
KABC020003282023
IN THE COURT OF THE IX ASCJ. SMALL CAUSES AND
ADDL. MACT, BENGALURU, (SCCH - 7)
DATED THIS 3rd DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024
BEFORE: SRI.UMESH S. ATNURE,
B.Com.LL.B.(Spl)
IX Addl. Small Causes Judge,
Court of Small Causes,
Member, MACT7, Bengaluru.
M.V.C. No.81, 82, 83, 84 AND 85 OF 2023
(M.V.C.No.81/2023 IS THE MAIN CASE)
PARTIES IN M.V.C.No.81/2023
Lakshmamma,
W/o Narayanappa,
Aged about 70 years,
No.146, Kallinayakanahalli,
Gowribidanur Taluk,
Chikkaballapura District.
Petitioner's
VERSUS -
01. Shriram General Insurance Company Ltd.,
No.3/5, 3rd Floor, S.V. Arcade,
Belekahalli Main Road,
2 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
Off: Bannerughatta Road,
IIMB Post, Bengaluru - 76.
(Insurer of TATA Ace Goods vehicle
bearing registration No.KA25D0670),
Policy No.418056/31/22/003676
valid from 08.02.2022 to 07.02.2023.
2. Totappa, Major, S/o Devappa,
Nittali Hatti Village,
Koppal, Alwadi,
Koppal - 583 226.
(Policy holder of TATA Ace vehicle
bearing registration No.KA25D0670)
3. Suresh Kodli, Major, S/o Mallappa,
A/P Kadakol,
Gadag - 582 120.
(RC Owner of TATA Ace Goods vehicle
bearing registration No.KA25D0670)
4. United India Insurance Co. Ltd.,
Regional Office, T.P. Hub, 5th and 6th Floor,
Krishi Bhavan, Hudson Circle,
Bengaluru - 560001.
(Insurer of Private Bus bearing registration
No.KA06B4189)
Policy No.0730013122P100324840
valid from 07.04.2022 to 06.04.2023.
3 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
5. S.N. Anil Kumar, Major,
S/o S. Nagaraju,
No.16, 1st Cross, A.V. Road,
Kalasipalyam Bus Stand,
Bengaluru - 560 002.
(R.C. Owner of Private Bus bearing registration
No.KA06B4189)
Respondents
PARTIES IN M.V.C.No.82/2023
Nagamani,
Aged about 58 years,
W/o Hanumantharayappa,
Kallinayakanahalli,
Gowribidanur Taluk,
Chikkaballapura District.
Petitioner's
VERSUS -
01. Shriram General Insurance Company Ltd.,
No.3/5, 3rd Floor, S.V. Arcade,
Belekahalli Main Road,
Off: Bannerughatta Road,
IIMB Post, Bengaluru - 76.
(Insurer of TATA Ace Goods vehicle
bearing registration No.KA25D0670),
Policy No.418056/31/22/003676
valid from 08.02.2022 to 07.02.2023.
2. Totappa, Major, S/o Devappa,
Nittali Hatti Village,
4 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
Koppal, Alwadi,
Koppal - 583 226.
(Policy holder of TATA Ace vehicle
bearing registration No.KA25D0670)
3. Suresh Kodli, Major, S/o Mallappa,
A/P Kadakol,
Gadag - 582 120.
(RC Owner of TATA Ace Goods vehicle
bearing registration No.KA25D0670)
4. United India Insurance Co. Ltd.,
Regional Office, T.P. Hub, 5th and 6th Floor,
Krishi Bhavan, Hudson Circle,
Bengaluru - 560001.
(Insurer of Private Bus bearing registration
No.KA06B4189)
Policy No.0730013122P100324840
valid from 07.04.2022 to 06.04.2023.
5. S.N. Anil Kumar, Major,
S/o S. Nagaraju,
No.16, 1st Cross, A.V. Road,
Kalasipalyam Bus Stand,
Bengaluru - 560 002.
(R.C. Owner of Private Bus bearing registration
No.KA06B4189)
Respondents
5 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
PARTIES IN M.V.C.No.83/2023
Jayamma,
W/o Thimmaiah
Aged about 43 years,
Kallinayakanahalli,
Gowribidanur Taluk,
Chikkaballapura District.
Petitioner's
VERSUS -
01. Shriram General Insurance Company Ltd.,
No.3/5, 3rd Floor, S.V. Arcade,
Belekahalli Main Road,
Off: Bannerughatta Road,
IIMB Post, Bengaluru - 76.
(Insurer of TATA Ace Goods vehicle
bearing registration No.KA25D0670),
Policy No.418056/31/22/003676
valid from 08.02.2022 to 07.02.2023.
2. Totappa, Major, S/o Devappa,
Nittali Hatti Village,
Koppal, Alwadi,
Koppal - 583 226.
(Policy holder of TATA Ace vehicle
bearing registration No.KA25D0670)
3. Suresh Kodli, Major, S/o Mallappa,
A/P Kadakol,
Gadag - 582 120.
6 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
(RC Owner of TATA Ace Goods vehicle
bearing registration No.KA25D0670)
4. United India Insurance Co. Ltd.,
Regional Office, T.P. Hub, 5th and 6th Floor,
Krishi Bhavan, Hudson Circle,
Bengaluru - 560001.
(Insurer of Private Bus bearing registration
No.KA06B4189)
Policy No.0730013122P100324840
valid from 07.04.2022 to 06.04.2023.
5. S.N. Anil Kumar, Major,
S/o S. Nagaraju,
No.16, 1st Cross, A.V. Road,
Kalasipalyam Bus Stand,
Bengaluru - 560 002.
(R.C. Owner of Private Bus bearing registration
No.KA06B4189)
Respondents
PARTIES IN M.V.C.No.84/2023
Shashikala,
W/o Ashwatha Reddy,
Aged about 42 years,
Gowdasandra,
Vidurashwatha,
Gowribidanur Taluk,
Chikkaballapura District.
Petitioner's
7 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
VERSUS -
01. Shriram General Insurance Company Ltd.,
No.3/5, 3rd Floor, S.V. Arcade,
Belekahalli Main Road,
Off: Bannerughatta Road,
IIMB Post, Bengaluru - 76.
(Insurer of TATA Ace Goods vehicle
bearing registration No.KA25D0670),
Policy No.418056/31/22/003676
valid from 08.02.2022 to 07.02.2023.
2. Totappa, Major, S/o Devappa,
Nittali Hatti Village,
Koppal, Alwadi,
Koppal - 583 226.
(Policy holder of TATA Ace vehicle
bearing registration No.KA25D0670)
3. Suresh Kodli, Major, S/o Mallappa,
A/P Kadakol,
Gadag - 582 120.
(RC Owner of TATA Ace Goods vehicle
bearing registration No.KA25D0670)
4. United India Insurance Co. Ltd.,
Regional Office, T.P. Hub, 5th and 6th Floor,
Krishi Bhavan, Hudson Circle,
Bengaluru - 560001.
(Insurer of Private Bus bearing registration
8 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
No.KA06B4189)
Policy No.0730013122P100324840
valid from 07.04.2022 to 06.04.2023.
5. S.N. Anil Kumar, Major,
S/o S. Nagaraju,
No.16, 1st Cross, A.V. Road,
Kalasipalyam Bus Stand,
Bengaluru - 560 002.
(R.C. Owner of Private Bus bearing registration
No.KA06B4189)
Respondents
PARTIES IN M.V.C.No.85/2023
Kalavathi,
W/o Venkatesh,
Aged about 34 years,
Kallinayakanahalli,
Gowribidanur Taluk,
Chikkaballapura District.
Petitioner's
VERSUS -
01. Shriram General Insurance Company Ltd.,
No.3/5, 3rd Floor, S.V. Arcade,
Belekahalli Main Road,
Off: Bannerughatta Road,
IIMB Post, Bengaluru - 76.
(Insurer of TATA Ace Goods vehicle
bearing registration No.KA25D0670),
Policy No.418056/31/22/003676
valid from 08.02.2022 to 07.02.2023.
9 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
2. Totappa, Major, S/o Devappa,
Nittali Hatti Village,
Koppal, Alwadi,
Koppal - 583 226.
(Policy holder of TATA Ace vehicle
bearing registration No.KA25D0670)
3. Suresh Kodli, Major, S/o Mallappa,
A/P Kadakol,
Gadag - 582 120.
(RC Owner of TATA Ace Goods vehicle
bearing registration No.KA25D0670)
4. United India Insurance Co. Ltd.,
Regional Office, T.P. Hub, 5th and 6th Floor,
Krishi Bhavan, Hudson Circle,
Bengaluru - 560001.
(Insurer of Private Bus bearing registration
No.KA06B4189)
Policy No.0730013122P100324840
valid from 07.04.2022 to 06.04.2023.
5. S.N. Anil Kumar, Major,
S/o S. Nagaraju,
No.16, 1st Cross, A.V. Road,
Kalasipalyam Bus Stand,
Bengaluru - 560 002.
(R.C. Owner of Private Bus bearing registration
No.KA06B4189)
Respondents
===
10 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
Petitioners in all cases by Sri. H.R.Ramesh, Advocate
Respondent No.1 in all cases by Sri.S.R.Murthy, Advocate
Respondent No.2 in MVC No.81/2023, MVC No.82/2023, MVC
No.84/2023 and MVC No.85/2023 are placed exparte
Respondent No.2 in MVC No.83/2023 by Sri.K.V.Shiva Reddy,
Advocate
Respondent No.3 in MVC No.81/2023 and MVC No.83/2023 by
Sri.K.V. Shiva Reddy, Advocate,
Respondent No.3 in MVC No.82/2023, MVC No.84/2023 and MVC
No.85/2023 placed exparte
Respondent No.4 in all cases by Sri.R.S. Srikanta Reddy,
Advocate,
Respondent No.5 in all cases by Sri.G.N.Subramani, Advocate
===
Date of filing of petitions in M.V.C.Nos.81 to 85 of 2023 on
04.01.2023.
===
:COMMONJUDGMENT:
1. These cases are arising out of same accident, as such by
order dated 25.07.2023 the M.V.C.No.82/2023, M.V.C.
No.83/2023, M.V.C.No.84/2023 and M.V.C. No.85/2023 the
said cases are clubbed with M.V.C.No.81/2023. The
M.V.C.No.81/2023 is the main case.
2. The M.V.C.No.81/2023 is filed by the petitioner for claiming
compensation of Rs.15,00,000/ for the injuries sustained by
11 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
her, the M.V.C.No.82/2023 is filed by the petitioner for
claiming compensation of Rs.10,00,000/ for the injuries
sustained by her, the M.V.C.No.83/2023 is filed by the
petitioner for claiming compensation of Rs.7,00,000/ for the
injuries sustained by her, the M.V.C.No.84/2023 is filed by
the petitioner for claiming compensation of Rs.7,00,000/ for
the injuries sustained by her and the M.V.C.No.85/2023 is
filed by the petitioner for claiming compensation of
Rs.7,00,000/ for the injuries sustained by her in the
accident occurred on 27.10.2022..
3. It is the case of the petitioners in M.V.C.No.81/2023 to
M.V.C.No.85/2023 that on 27.10.2022 at about 5.45 p.m.,
they were pedestrian on the left side of Bengaluru
Gowribidanur SH9 road along with other Coolies towards
Kallingyakanahalli Village, Thondebhavi Hobli,
Gowribidanur Taluk, and all were reached infront of Bayar
Company, at that time the driver of the Tata ACE goods
12 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
vehicle bearing registration No.KA25D0670 drove the
same at high speed in a rash and negligent manner and
dashed against the petitioners and the Private Bus bearing
registration No.KA06B4189 was dashed against rear side
of the said Tata Ace Goods vehicle and as a result they
sustained grievous injuries. Immediately they were shifted
to Government Hospital, Gowribidanur, wherein they were
admitted as an inpatient. The petitioner in
M.V.C.No.81/2023 after first aid, she was shifted Profile
Multi Speciality Hospital, Bengaluru, wherein she was
admitted as an inpatient.
4. The petitioner in M.V.C.No.81/2023 contended that prior to
the accident the she was hale and healthy and aged about
70 years and she was Agriculturist and coolie and earning
Rs.20,000/ p.m., and due to the injuries sustained in the
accident she permanently disabled and not in a position to
do work.
13 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
5. The petitioner in M.V.C.No.82/2023 contended that prior to
the accident she was hale and healthy and aged about 58
years and and she was working as Agriculture and Coolie
and earning Rs.20,000/ p.m., and due to the injuries
sustained in the accident she permanently disabled and not
in a position to do work.
6. The petitioner in M.V.C.No.83/2023 contended that prior to
the accident the she was hale and healthy and aged about
43 years and she was working as Agriculture and Coolie
and earning Rs.20,000/ p.m., and due to the injuries
sustained in the accident she permanently disabled and not
in a position to do work.
7. The petitioner in M.V.C.No.84/2023 contended that prior to
the accident the she was hale and healthy and aged about
42 years and she was working as Agriculture and Coolie
and earning Rs.20,000/ p.m., and due to the injuries
14 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
sustained in the accident she permanently disabled and not
in a position to do work.
8. The petitioner in M.V.C.No.85/2023 contended that prior to
the accident the she was hale and healthy and aged about
34 years and she was working as Agriculture and Coolie
and earning Rs.20,000/ p.m., and due to the injuries
sustained in the accident she permanently disabled and not
in a position to do work.
9. Further the petitioners are contended that this accident is
occurred due to the negligence of the driver of the Tata
ACE Goods vehicle bearing registration No.KA26D0670
and Private Bus bearing registration No.KA06B4189.
The respondent No.1 is the insurer of Tata Ace Goods,
respondent No.2 is the policy holder of Tata Ace Goods,
respondent No.3 is the Owner of Tata Ace Goods,
respondent No.4 insurer of private Bus and respondent
No.5 is the owner of private Bus, hence the respondent No.1
15 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
to 5 are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to
them. Hence they prayed to allow their petitions.
10. In response to the notice issued by this tribunal in all the
cases the respondent No.1, 3, 4 and 5 have appeared
through their counsel and filed their written statements by
taking same contentions in all the cases. The respondent
No.2 is placed exparte.
11. The respondent No.1 filed the written statement by denying
the entire contention of the petitioners. Further the
respondent No.1 admitted that they have issued the policy
in respect of Tata Ace Goods vehicle No.KA25D0670 was
in force as on the date of the accident, but their liability is
subject to the terms and conditions of the policy. Further
contended that the 2nd and 3rd respondent of Tata Ace Goods
vehicle was not having valid and effective driving license,
valid RC, permit and FC at the time of the accident, hence
they are not liable to pay any compensation to the
16 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
petitioner. Hence, on all these grounds, the respondent
No.1 has prayed for dismissal of claim petition.
12. The respondent No.3 filed the written statement by denying
the entire contention of the petitioners. Further the
respondent No.3 admitted that he is the RC owner of Tata
Ace Goods vehicle and it is insured with the 1 st respondent
and same is in force as on the date of accident. Hence they
are not liable to pay any compensation to the petitioner.
Hence, on all these grounds, the respondent No.3 has
prayed for dismissal of claim petition.
13. The respondent No.4 filed the written statement by denying
the entire contention of the petitioners. Further the
respondent No.4 admitted that they have issued the policy
in respect of Private Bus bearing No.KA06B4189 was in
force as on the date of the accident, but their liability is
subject to the terms and conditions of the policy. Further
contended that the driver of Private Bus was not having
17 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
valid and effective driving license, valid RC, permit and FC
at the time of the accident. Further contended that the
alleged accident occurred solely due to the rash and
negligent driving of the driver of Tata Ace Goods, hence
they are not liable to pay any compensation to the
petitioner. Hence, on all these grounds, the respondent
No.4 has prayed for dismissal of claim petition.
14. The respondent No.5 filed the written statement by denying
the entire contention of the petitioners. Further the
respondent No.5 admitted that he is the RC owner of
Private Bus and it is insured with the 4 th respondent and
same was in force as on the date of accident. Hence he is
not liable to pay any compensation to the petitioner.
Hence, on all these grounds, the respondent No.5 has
prayed for dismissal of claim petition.
15. On the basis of above pleadings following Issues were
framed.
18 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
ISSUES IN M.V.C.No.81/2023
(1) Whether the Petitioners prove that the
accident occurred due to rash and negligent
act of driving of Tata ACE Goods vehicle
bearing registration No.KA25D0670 and as
a result, she sustained injuries?
(2) Whether the Petitioner proves the age and
earnings of the Petitioner as stated in the
claim petition?
(3) Whether petitioner is entitled for
compensation? If so, how much and from
whom?
(4) What order or award?
19 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
ISSUES IN M.V.C.No.82/2023
(1) Whether the Petitioner proves that the
accident occurred due to rash and negligent
act of driving of Tata ACE Goods vehicle
bearing registration No.KA25D0670 and
as a result she sustained injuries?
(2) Whether the Petitioner proves the age and
earnings of the Petitioner as stated in the
claim petition?
(3) Whether petitioner is entitled for
compensation? If so, how much and from
whom?
(4) What order or award?
ISSUES IN M.V.C.No.83/2023
(1) Whether the Petitioners prove that the
accident occurred due to rash and negligent
act of driving of Tata ACE Goods vehicle
20 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
bearing registration No.KA25D0670 and as
a result, she sustained injuries?
(2) Whether the Petitioner proves the age and
earnings of the Petitioner as stated in the
claim petition?
(3) Whether petitioner is entitled for
compensation? If so, how much and from
whom?
(4) What order or award?
ISSUES IN M.V.C.No.84/2023
1. Whether the Petitioners prove that the
accident occurred due to rash and negligent
act of driving of Tata ACE Goods vehicle
bearing registration No.KA25D0670 and
as a result, she sustained injuries?
21 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
2. Whether the Petitioner proves the age and
earnings of the Petitioner as stated in the
claim petition?
3. Whether petitioner is entitled for
compensation? If so, how much and from
whom?
4. What order or award?
ISSUES IN M.V.C.No.85/2023
1. Whether the Petitioners prove that the
accident occurred due to rash and negligent
act of driving of Tata ACE Goods vehicle
bearing registration No.KA25D0670 and as
a result, she sustained injuries?
2. Whether the Petitioner proves the age and
earnings of the Petitioner as stated in the
claim petition?
22 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
3. Whether petitioner is entitled for
compensation? If so, how much and from
whom?
4. What order or award?
16. In order to prove the case of the petitioners, the petitioner
in M.V.C.No.81/2023 is examined as PW.1 and got marked
Ex.P.1 to Ex. P.12. The petitioner in M.V.C.No.82/2023 is
examined as PW.2 and got marked Ex.P.13 to P.15, the
petitioner in M.V.C.No.83/2023 is examined as PW.3 and
got marked Ex.P.16 to Ex.P.18 and the petitioner in
M.V.C.No.84/2023 is examined as PW4 and got marked
Ex.P19 to Ex.P21, the petitioner in M.V.C. No.85/2023 is
examined as PW5 and got marked Ex.P22 to Ex.P26. The
petitioner in M.V.C.No.81/2023 is examined Medical
Record Technician in Prolife Multi Speciality Hospital as
PW6 and got marked Ex.P27 to Ex.P30 and closed their
side. The respondent No.1 examined its Legal Officer as
23 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
RW1 and got marked Ex.R1 and R2 and other
Respondents have not adduce any evidence .
17. Heard the arguments of both side and I have perused the
material available on record.
18. My findings to the above referred Issues are as under;
ISSUES IN M.V.C. No.81/2023
Issue No.1 : In the Affirmative
Issue No.2 : Partly in the affirmative
Issue No.3 : Partly in the affirmative
Issue No.4 : As per final order for the
following.......
ISSUES IN M.V.C. No.82/2023
Issue No.1 : In the Affirmative
Issue No.2 : Partly in the affirmative
Issue No.3 : Partly in the affirmative
Issue No.4 : As per final order for the
following.......
24 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
ISSUES IN M.V.C. No.83/2023
Issue No.1 : In the Affirmative
Issue No.2 : Partly in the affirmative
Issue No.3 : Partly in the affirmative
Issue No.4 : As per final order for the
following.......
ISSUES IN M.V.C. No.84/2023
Issue No.1 : In the Affirmative
Issue No.2 : Partly in the affirmative
Issue No.3 : Partly in the affirmative
Issue No.4 : As per final order for the
following.......
ISSUES IN M.V.C. No.85/2023
Issue No.1 : In the Affirmative
Issue No.2 : Partly in the affirmative
Issue No.3 : Partly in the affirmative
Issue No.4 : As per final order for the
25 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
following.......
:REASONS:
19. Issue No.1 in all cases : The petitioners in M.V.C.
No.81/2023 to M.V.C.No.85/2023 are examined as PW.1 to
PW.5 and in their examination in chief they deposed as per
contention taken by them. The PW.1 has produced FIR as
per Ex.P.1, Complaint as per Ex.P.2, Spot Mahazar as per
Ex.P.3, Spot Sketch as per Ex.P.4, IMV Report as per
Ex.P.5, Wound Certificate as per Ex.P.6 and Charge Sheet
as per Ex.P.7. Further the PW.2 has produced Wound
Certificate as per Ex.P.13, PW.3 has produced Wound
Certificate as per Ex.P.16, PW.4 has produced Wound
Certificate as per Ex.P.19 and PW.5 has produced Wound
Certificate as per Ex.P.22. By perusing these documents it
clearly goes to shows that this accident was occurred due to
the negligence of the driver of Tata ACE Goods vehicle
bearing registration No.KA25D0670 and also due to the
26 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
negligence of the driver of the Bus bearing No.KA06B
4186.
20. In the crossexamination by respondent No.4 they deposed
that as on the date of the accident they went to Coolie work
and this accident was occurred at 600 p.m., and one Tempo
dashed against them and the said tempo dashed against
them from behind and the there is 3 feet distance in
between the footpath and road. They denied that they are
negligently going on the road as such due to their
negligence this accident was took place. They also denied
that there is no negligence on the part of the driver of the
Bus bearing registration No.KA06B4189. They deposed
that they have not produced the spot sketch. They denied
that the Bus bearing registration No.KA06B4189 was not
dashed to the Tempo as such intentionally they have not
produced the spot sketch and in this accident the Bus
bearing registration No.KA06B4189 is not involved as
27 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
such the respondents no.4 and 5 are not liable to pay any
compensation to them. Further deposed that as per Ex.P.5
the Bus was not sustained any damages and by colluding
with the police they have lodged false complaint against the
offending vehicle. Further deposed that after the accident
they shifted to Gowribidanuru Government Hospital and in
the Gowribidanuru Government they mentioned the vehicle
number which involved in the accident and they are not
having any impediment to produce the MLC record of
Gowribidanur Government Hospital. They denied that to
get compensation they deposed falsely.
21. In the cross examination by respondent No.1 they deposed
that when they are returning to their home after coolie
work one Tempo was coming and behind the tempo Bus was
coming and the Bus dashed to the Tempo and the Tempo
dashed to them. Further they deposed that as the Bus
dashed to the Tempo as such Tempo dashed to them. They
28 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
denied that only due to the negligence of the driver of the
Bus this accident was took place and there is no negligence
on the part of the driver of the tempo. They also denied
that only the owner and insurer of the Bus are liable to pay
compensation to them.
22. In support their case the petitioner in M.V.C.No.81/2022
got examined Medical Record Technician of Prolife Hospital
as PW.6 and PW.6 has produced Authorization letter as per
Ex.P.27, MLC register as per Ex.P.28, Police Intimation as
per Ex.P.29 and IP Record as per Ex.P.30. In his cross
examination he deposed that immediately after accident
she has not taken treatment in their hospital and he do not
know immediately after the accident the where the
petitioner has taken treatment. Further he deposed his
ignorance that initially the petitioner has taken treatment
at Gowribidanuru Government Hospital. He denied that
after discharge from the Gowribidanuru Government
29 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
Hospital the petitioner was went to her house and to help
the petitioner he has got created Ex.P.28 to Ex.P.30 and
produced by the court. He deposed that petitioner has taken
further treatment at their hospital. He denied that to help
the Petitioner he is deposing falsely.
23. Further the Legal Officer of Insurance Company got
examined as RW.1 and in his examination in chief he
deposed as per contention taken by them and he got
marked Authorization letter as per Ex.R.1 and Copy of
Insurance Policy as per Ex.R.2. In the crossexamination
by the counsel for the petitioner he deposed that he has not
seen the accident and they have not conducted any
investigation about this accident and they have issued to
the notice to the owner of the TATA Ace vehicle bearing
registration No.KA25D0670 and the owner of the said
vehicle not replied to the said notice and he has not
produced the said notice and based on the police documents
30 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
he is deposing falsely. He denied that this accident was
occurred due to the negligence of their insured vehicle and
the police have filed false Charge Sheet against their
insured vehicle and to escape from the liability of paying
compensation to the petitioners he is deposing falsely. In
the crossexamination by the counsel for respondent No.4
he deposed that he do not know the owner of the offending
vehicle has appeared before the court and paid fine. He
denied that as per police record this accident was occurred
due to the negligence of the driver of the TATA Ace vehicle
and they are liable to pay compensation to the petitioners
and in this accident the Bus bearing registration No.KA06
B4189 is not at all involved and to escape from the liability
of paying compensation to the petitioners he is deposing
falsely.
24. From the oral evidence of PW.1 to PW.6 and RW.1 nothing
worth is brought on record to show that there is no
31 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
negligence on the part of the driver of the TATA ACE
bearing registration No.KA25D0670 and driver of the
Bus bearing No.KA06B4189. Further by perusing the
entire oral and documentary evidence adduced by the both
parties it is clear that this accident is occurred due to the
negligence of the driver of the TATA ACE bearing
registration No.KA25D0670 and also due to the
negligence of the driver of the Bus bearing No.KA06B
4189. By perusing the oral and documentary evidence
adduced by the petitioners it clearly goes to shows that the
petitioners were pedestrians on the left side of Bengaluru -
Gowribidanur SH9 Road and they were returning to their
house after finishing their Coolies work towards
Kallinayakanahalli Village, Thondebhavi Hobli,
Gowribidanur Taluk, in front of Bayar company at that
time the driver of the Bus bearing No.KA06B4189 drove
the same in high speed and negligent manner and dashed
32 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
to the TATA ACE bearing registration No.KA25D0670
and the driver of the said TATA ACE was also driving the
same in high speed, rash and negligent manner and dashed
against the petitioners and due to impact they fell down
and sustained grievous injuries. Further by perusing the
Charge Sheet marked as per Ex.P.7 it is clear that the
police after conducting the investigation came to the
conclusion that this accident was occurred due to the
negligence of the driver of the Bus bearing No.KA06B
4189 and also due to the negligence of the driver of TATA
ACE Goods vehicle bearing registration No.KA25D0670.
Hence it is clear that the driver of the Bus and driver of the
TATA ACE are contributed their negligence equally.
Further by perusing the Wound Certificates of the
petitioners marked as per Ex.P.6, Ex.P.13, 16, 19 and 22
they clearly goes to shows that in this accident the
33 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
petitioners are sustained injuries. Hence I answered the
issue No.1 in all cases in the affirmative.
25. Issue No.2 in all cases: The petitioner in
M.V.C.No.81/2023 contended that as on the date of accident
she was aged about 70 years and she was Agricultural and
Coolie and earning Rs.20,000/ p.m. Due to the injuries
sustained in the accident she became permanently disabled.
26. In order to prove the age of the petitioner, he relied on the
Adhar Card marked as per Ex.P.12, wherein the date of
birth of the petitioner is shown as 01.01.1945 and this
accident took place on 27.10.2022. Hence, the age of
petitioner is considered at 77 years as on the date of
accident.
27. So for as income of the petitioner is concern the petitioner
contended that she was working as Agriculturist and coolie
and earning Rs.20,000/ p.m. In support of this contention
34 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
the petitioner has not produced any documents to show that
she was earning Rs.20,000/ p.m. Hence in the absence of
the acceptable material with regard to the income, by
considering the occupation, age the notional income of the
petitioner is considered as Rs.15,500/ p.m. and occupation
of the petitioner is considered as agricultural and coolie.
28. The petitioner in M.V.C.No.82/2023 contended that as on
the date of accident he was aged about 58 years and she
was working as Agricultural and Coolie and thereby
earning Rs.20,000/ p.m. Due to the injuries sustained in
the accident she became permanently disabled.
29. In order to prove the age of the petitioner, she relied on the
Adhar Card marked as per Ex.P.15 wherein the date of
birth of the petitioner is shown as 01.01.1964. Hence, the
age of petitioner is considered at 58 years as on the date of
accident.
35 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
30. So for as income of the petitioner is concern the petitioner
contended that he was working as Agricultural and Coolie
and thereby earning Rs.20,000/ p.m. In support of this
contention the petitioner has not produced any documents
to show that she was earning Rs.20,000/ p.m. Hence in the
absence of the acceptable material with regard to the
income, by considering the occupation, age the notional
income of the petitioner is considered as Rs.15,500/ p.m.
and occupation of the petitioner is considered as
agricultural and coolie.
31. The petitioner in M.V.C.No.83/2023 contended that as on
the date of accident she was aged about 43 years and she
was working as agricultural and coolie and thereby earning
Rs.20,000/ p.m. Due to the injuries sustained in the
accident she became permanently disabled.
32. In order to prove the age of the petitioner, she relied on the
Adhar Card marked as per Ex.P.18 wherein the date of
36 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
birth of the petitioner is shown as 01.01.1979. Hence, the
age of petitioner is considered at 43 years as on the date of
accident.
33. So for as income of the petitioner is concern the petitioner
contended that he was working as Agricultural and Coolie
and thereby earning Rs.20,000/ p.m. In support of this
contention the petitioner has not produced any documents
to show that she was earning Rs.20,000/ p.m. Hence in the
absence of the acceptable material with regard to the
income, by considering the occupation, age the notional
income of the petitioner is considered as Rs.15,500/ p.m.
and occupation of the petitioner is considered as
agricultural and coolie.
34. The petitioner in M.V.C.No.84/2023 contended that as on
the date of accident she was aged about 42 years and she
was working as agricultural and coolie and thereby earning
37 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
Rs.20,000/ p.m. Due to the injuries sustained in the
accident she became permanently disabled.
35. In order to prove the age of the petitioner, she relied on the
Adhar Card marked as per Ex.P.21 wherein the date of
birth of the petitioner is shown as 01.01.1980. Hence, the
age of petitioner is considered at 42 years as on the date of
accident.
36. So for as income of the petitioner is concern the petitioner
contended that he was working as Agricultural and Coolie
and thereby earning Rs.20,000/ p.m. In support of this
contention the petitioner has not produced any documents
to show that she was earning Rs.20,000/ p.m. Hence in the
absence of the acceptable material with regard to the
income, by considering the occupation, age the notional
income of the petitioner is considered as Rs.15,500/ p.m.
and occupation of the petitioner is considered as
agricultural and coolie.
38 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
37. The petitioner in M.V.C.No.85/2023 contended that as on
the date of accident she was aged about 34 years and she
was working as agricultural and coolie and thereby earning
Rs.20,000/ p.m. Due to the injuries sustained in the
accident she became permanently disabled.
38. In order to prove the age of the petitioner, she relied on the
Adhar Card marked as per Ex.P.26 wherein the date of
birth of the petitioner is shown as 01.01.1988. Hence, the
age of petitioner is considered at 34 years as on the date of
accident.
39. So for as income of the petitioner is concern the petitioner
contended that he was working as Agricultural and Coolie
and thereby earning Rs.20,000/ p.m. In support of this
contention the petitioner has not produced any documents
to show that she was earning Rs.20,000/ p.m. Hence in the
absence of the acceptable material with regard to the
income, by considering the occupation, age the notional
39 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
income of the petitioner is considered as Rs.15,500/ p.m.
and occupation of the petitioner is considered as
agricultural and coolie. Hence, I answered the Issue
No.2 in all cases partly in the affirmative.
40. Issue No.3 in all cases: The petitioner in
M.V.C.No.81/2023 contended that in the accident she has
sustained head injury, sub archnold hemorrhage, Acute
Gastrits and other injuries and due to these injuries she is
not in a position to do any work and she became
permanently disabled. By perusing the wound certificate
marked as per Ex.P.6 it goes to show that in the accident
the petitioner has sustained head injury, sub archnold
hemorrhage, Acute Gastrits. But the petitioner has not
produced any acceptable evidence to show that due to the
injuries sustained in the accident she has became
permanently disabled. Without their being any evidence
with regard to the disability of the petitioner the contention
40 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
of the petitioner is not acceptable one. Under such
circumstances the question of granting compensation under
the head of loss of future earnings does not arise at all. No
doubt the petitioner was sustained head injury, sub
archnold hemorrhage, Acute Gastrits and due to the
injuries sustained in the accident she has admitted in the
hospital. Hence the petitioner is entitle for global
compensation of Rs.50,000/. Further the petitioner has
produced Hospital and Medical Bills as per Ex.P.9 for an
amount of Rs.1,01,020/. Hence the Petitioner is entitled for
compensation of Rs.1,01,020/ under the hospital and
medical expenses. In all the petitioner in M.V.C.No.81/2023
is entitled for just and reasonable compensation of
Rs.1,51,020/.
41. The petitioner in M.V.C.No.82/2023 contended that in the
accident she has sustained fracture left clavicle outer 1/3 rd
and other injuries and due to these injuries she is not in a
41 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
position to do any work and she became permanently
disabled. By perusing the wound certificate marked as per
Ex.P.13 it goes to show that in the accident the petitioner
has sustained abrasion over right elbow, tenderness over
left shoulder and fracture of left clavicle outer 1/3 rd. But the
petitioner has not produced any acceptable evidence to
show that due to the injuries sustained in the accident she
has became permanently disabled. Without their being any
evidence with regard to the disability of the petitioner the
contention of the petitioner is not acceptable one. Under
such circumstances the question of granting compensation
under the head of loss of future earnings does not arise at
all. No doubt the petitioner was sustained abrasion over
right elbow, tenderness over left shoulder and fracture of
left clavicle outer 1/3rd and due to the injuries sustained in
the accident she has admitted in the hospital. Hence the
42 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
petitioner in M.V.C.No.82/2023 is entitle for global
compensation of Rs.75,000/.
42. The petitioner in M.V.C.No.83/2023 contended that in the
accident she has sustained multiple injuries over right
elbow, shoulder and injuries to other parts of the body and
due to these injuries she is not in a position to do any work
and she became permanently disabled. By perusing the
wound certificate marked as per Ex.P.16 it goes to show
that in the accident the petitioner has sustained tenderness
in right elbow and shoulder. But the petitioner has not
produced any acceptable evidence to show that due to the
injuries sustained in the accident she has became
permanently disabled. Without their being any evidence
with regard to the disability of the petitioner the contention
of the petitioner is not acceptable one. Under such
circumstances the question of granting compensation under
the head of loss of future earnings does not arise at all. No
43 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
doubt the petitioner was sustained tenderness in right
elbow and shoulder and due to the injuries sustained in the
accident she has admitted in the hospital. Hence the
petitioner in M.V.C.No.83/2023 is entitle for global
compensation of Rs.50,000/.
43. The petitioner in M.V.C.No.84/2023 contended that in the
accident she has sustained multiple injuries over upper lip,
left palm, right forearm and injuries to other parts of the
body and due to these injuries she is not in a position to do
any work and she became permanently disabled. By
perusing the wound certificate marked as per Ex.P.19 it
goes to show that in the accident the petitioner has
sustained swelling of upper lip, abrasion 1 x 1 cm upper lip,
abrasion over left palm and cut lacerated wound 1 x 1 cm
over right forearm. But the petitioner has not produced any
acceptable evidence to show that due to the injuries
sustained in the accident she has became permanently
44 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
disabled. Without their being any evidence with regard to
the disability of the petitioner the contention of the
petitioner is not acceptable one. Under such circumstances
the question of granting compensation under the head of
loss of future earnings does not arise at all. No doubt the
petitioner was sustained swelling of upper lip, abrasion 1 x
1 cm upper lip, abrasion over left palm and cut lacerated
wound 1 x 1 cm over right forearm and due to the injuries
sustained in the accident she has admitted in the hospital.
Hence the petitioner in M.V.C.No.84/2023 is entitle for
global compensation of Rs.50,000/.
44. The petitioner in M.V.C.No.85/2023 contended that in the
accident she has sustained multiple injuries over right
ankle and other injuries and due to these injuries she is not
in a position to do any work and she became permanently
disabled. By perusing the wound certificate marked as per
Ex.P.22 it goes to show that in the accident the petitioner
45 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
has sustained tenderness and swelling over right ankle.
But the petitioner has not produced any acceptable
evidence to show that due to the injuries sustained in the
accident she has became permanently disabled. Without
their being any evidence with regard to the disability of the
petitioner the contention of the petitioner is not acceptable
one. Under such circumstances the question of granting
compensation under the head of loss of future earnings does
not arise at all. No doubt the petitioner was sustained
tenderness and swelling over right ankle and due to the
injuries sustained in the accident she has admitted in the
hospital. Hence the petitioner is entitle for global
compensation of Rs.50,000/. Further the petitioner has
produced Hospital and Medical Bills as per Ex.P.25 for an
amount of Rs.600/. Hence the petitioner is entitled for
compensation of Rs.600/ under the hospital and medical
expenses. In all the petitioner in M.V.C.No.85/2023 is
46 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
entitled for just and reasonable compensation of
Rs.50,600/.
45. While answering the issue No.1 in all the cases this
tribunal comes to the conclusion that, accident occurred due
to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Bus
bearing No.KA06B4189 and also due to the negligence of
the driver of the Tata Ace Goods vehicle bearing
registration No.KA25D0670. The respondent No.1 is the
insurer and the respondent No.2 is the policy holder and
respondent No.3 is the owner of the said TATA ACE Goods
vehicle. The respondent No.1 has admitted that as on the
date of the accident the TATA ACE Goods vehicle bearing
registration No.KA25D0670 was insured by them and as
on the date of the accident the policy was in force, but the
owner of the TATA ACE was not having valid permit hence
it is violation of terms and conditions of the policy as such
they are not liable to pay compensation to the petitioner. In
47 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
this regard the respondent No.1 has not produced any
acceptable evidence, without there being any evidence the
contention of the respondent No.1 is not acceptable one.
As on the date of the accident the policy issued to the TATA
ACE Goods vehicle bearing registration No.KA25D0670
was in force as such the respondent No.1 being the insurer,
respondent No.2 is the policy holder and the respondent
No.3 being the owner of the TATA ACE Goods vehicle
bearing registration No.KA25D0670 are jointly and
severally liable to pay 50% compensation to the petitioners
along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a., from the date of
petition.
46. As this accident was occurred also due to the negligence of
the driver of the Bus bearing No.KA06B4189. The
respondent No.4 the insurer and respondent No.5 is the
owner of the said Bus. The respondent No.4 admitted that
as on the date of the accident the policy issued to the said
48 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
Bus was in force, but their liability is subject to the terms
and conditions of the policy. Further the respondent No.4
has not lead any oral or documentary evidence to show that
as on the date of the accident the respondent No.5 has
violated the terms and conditions of the policy. Hence it is
clear that as on the date of the accident the policy issued to
the Bus bearing No.KA06B41879 as in force and there is
no violation of the terms and conditions of the policy by the
respondent No.5. As such the respondent No.4 being the
insurer, respondent No.5 being the owner of the Bus
bearing registration No.KA06B4189 are jointly and
severally liable to pay 50% compensation to the petitioners
along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a., from the date of
petition. Hence I answered the Issue No.3 in all cases
partly in the Affirmative.
47. Issue No.4 in both cases : For the aboves stated reasons, I
proceed to pass the following;
49 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
:ORDER:
Claim petitions filed by the petitioners U/Sec 166 of M.V. Act are partly allowed with costs of Rs.1,000/ each.
Petitioner in M.V.C.No.81/2023 is awarded just and reasonable compensation of Rs.1,51,020/ (Rupees One Lakh Fifty One Thousand Twenty Only) with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition to till the date of depositing of the compensation amount in the court.
Petitioner in M.V.C.No.82/2023 is awarded just and reasonable compensation of Rs.50,000/ (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition to till the date of depositing of the compensation amount in the court.
Petitioner in M.V.C.No.83/2023 is awarded just and reasonable compensation of Rs.50,000/ (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of 50 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023. SCCH 7 petition to till the date of depositing of the compensation amount in the court.
Petitioner in M.V.C.No.84/2023 is awarded just and reasonable compensation of Rs.50,000/ (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition to till the date of depositing of the compensation amount in the court.
Petitioner in M.V.C.No.85/2023 is awarded just and reasonable compensation of Rs.50,600/ (Rupees Fifty Thousand Six Hundred Only) with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition to till the date of depositing of the compensation amount in the court.
Respondent No.1 being insurer of Tata Ace Good vehicle bearing registration No.KA 25D0670 is directed to deposit the awarded 50% of the compensation amount along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a in the court within 02 month from the date of this judgment.
Respondent No.4 being insurer of Bus bearing registration No.KA06B4189 is 51 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023. SCCH 7 directed to deposit the awarded 50% of the compensation amount along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a in the court within 02 month from the date of this judgment. Draw award accordingly.
:APPORTIONMENT:
In M.V.C.No.81/2023 on deposit of compensation amount entire amount is to be released in favour of the petitioner under E payment and after verifying the stay order from the Hon'ble Appellate Court.
In M.V.C.No.82/2023 on deposit of compensation amount entire amount is to be released in favour of the petitioner under E payment and after verifying the stay order from the Hon'ble Appellate Court.
In M.V.C.No.83/2023 on deposit of compensation amount entire amount is to be released in favour of the petitioner under E payment and after verifying the stay order from the Hon'ble Appellate Court.52 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7 In M.V.C.No.84/2023 on deposit of compensation amount entire amount is to be released in favour of the petitioner under E payment and after verifying the stay order from the Hon'ble Appellate Court.
In M.V.C.No.85/2023 on deposit of compensation amount entire amount is to be released in favour of the petitioner under E payment and after verifying the stay order from the Hon'ble Appellate Court.
Since common judgment is passed in these cases original shall be kept in M.V.C.No.81/2023 and copy of the same shall be kept in another clubbed case. (Dictated to the Stenographer, typed by him, corrected and then, pronounced by me in the open Court on this, the 03.02.2024).
(Umesh S.Atnure) IX ASCJ & ACMM, Court of Small causes, Member MACT, Bengaluru.53 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7 : ANNEXURE :
List of exhibited documents marked for petitioners in both the cases.
PW.1 : Lakshmamma PW.2 : Nagamani PW.3 : Jayamma PW.4 : Shashikala PW.5 : Kalavathi PW.6 : T.G. Raghavendra
List of exhibited documents marked for Petitioner/s in both the cases.
Ex.P.1 : FIR
Ex.P.2 : Complaint
Ex.P.3 : Spot Mahazar
Ex.P.4 : Spot Sketch
Ex.P.5 : IMV Report
Ex.P.6 : Wound Certificate
Ex.P.7 : Charge Sheet
Ex.P.8 : Discharge summary
Ex.P.9 : Hospital and Medicine Bills
Ex.P.10 : Prescription
Ex.P.11 : Xray
54 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
Ex.P.12 : Aadhaar Card
Ex.P.13 : Wound Certificate
Ex.P.14 : Xray
Ex.P.15 : Aadhaar Card
Ex.P.16 : Wound Certificate
Ex.P.17 : Xray
Ex.P.18 : Aadhaar Card
Ex.P.19 : Wound Certificate
Ex.P.20 : Xray
Ex.P.21 : Aadhaar Card
Ex.P.22 : Wound Certificate
Ex.P.23 : Xray
Ex.P.24 : Prescription
Ex.P.25 : Hospital bills
Ex.P.26 : Aadhaar Card
Ex.P.27 : Authorization
Ex.P28 : MLC register extract
Ex.P.29 : Police Intimation
Ex.P.30 : I.P. Record
List of witnesses examined for the Respondent/s in both the cases:
RW1 : Anagha Prasad
55 M.V.C.Nos.81, 82, 83, 84 & 85 of 2023.
SCCH 7
List of exhibited documents marked for the Respondent/s in both the cases:
Ex.R1 : Authorization letter
Ex.R2 : Policy Copy
(Umesh S.Atnure)
IX ASCJ & ACMM,
Court of Small causes,
Member MACT, Bengaluru.Digitally signed by UMESH S
UMESH ATNURE
S Date:
2024.02.08
ATNURE 15:13:54
+0530