Karnataka High Court
A Yashwanth Since Dead By His Lrs Asha ... vs Radhakrishna Rai S/O Prabhakar Rai on 13 September, 2010
Bench: N.K.Patil, K.Govindarajulu
IN Tm: HIGH COURT or KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF' SEPTEMBER."
:PRESENT:
THE HONBLE MR..:Us'xfi1pE "
THE HoN*BLE MRJUSTECE
M.F.A. N0. 2005
Between: 'A
A. Yashwarith, A VVVV V
Since dead V
1. Smt.Ash§i_<«Y%{5l51$A}a'1jt1i;'~~.V
Aged about yea-s;(%'_% ', V
2. Kumafi " -- .
Agéd about 2O"y€a1jS?;-. '
3. Kumeiri' en¢¢t1ia,»' "
V' abotL1t,__16 years.
~ .,._Represented "
SII_zt._x~'L$ha Yashwanth.
' " *-.Mai1ga1ore~5'75 O02.
. --.Ap"peIia:1't;No. 1 is Wife
' and . 2' 3 are the chiidren of
'}'\.Y"-ashwanth, All are residing at
NG.,11,~ 13.8 Road, Kankanady Post.
. . . Appeflants
-- ASri.Y. Rajendra P sad Shetty, Advocate)
__"__W__'__,_,_m,_,,.....
. * A V Vfiepfeseiited bywits Manager.
I\)
A....I;C1.1
1. Radhakrishna Rai,
S / 0. Prabhakar Rai,
Subramanya Nilaya,
Derebail,
Manga1ore--6, D.K.
2. The Oriental Insurance C0,, Ltd.,
City Branch Office, '
RM. Rao Road,
Pi Land Building.
2116' Floor, V
Mangal0re--575 001
By its Manager.
3. B.HarishKurr_1ar, M
S/0.Gaja.nana'"VS1'1et',« ' _ _ V V
Residing at_..neai*Aiak.e-- _ A ''
Bridge_,[ M~anga.!pife--3'. *
4. United-.II1diaV~In suijance--- C0 Ltd. ,
Branch Ofi"1Ce,."._i"._ it "
Brigade Rcadd." _
Bahnatta'. . '-
M3-ang"a1ore-- 1' A
....Respondents
Swamy, Advocate far R2;
Sri«.._ O.V_Mah'esh, Advocate for R4
R1 aiidffi served and unrepresented]
=l==i=****$*
This MFA is filed U/s 173(1) of MV Act against the
" Judgment and Award dated: 19/1 1 /2004 passed in
-~-MVC No.512/ 1996 on the file cf the Member MAC'};'--VI &
%:.....
1} Additional Civil Judge (Sr.Dn), Mangalore,
dismissing the claim petition for compensation. '
This MFA. coming on for Hearing
N.K. PATIL J, deiivered the following:
This appeal by the claimants
impugned judgment and ld~ated_
passed in MVC No.512/199sAa_1{§j lichen Add}.:,Ci\{i.l Judge
(Sr.Dn.) and Member', Tribunal-
Vi, Mangaloret I?Jl'E{_._, as 'Tribunal'
for short). ' it ' A l
and award has
dismissed the l
Inlbrlie'f, the case are:
appeila'nt-------No.1 is the wife, appellant Nos. 2
'ifninor children of the deceased Sri. A.
Yiashwanthillnitially, the deceased Sri. Yashwanth has
a cl-aim petition under section 166 of M.V. Act,
compensation on account of the injuries
__S_Ll1StEiin€3d by him in the road traffic accident and after
A»
petition had come up for consideration before the Tribunal.
The Tribunal after assessing the oral and docurnentary
evidence and other material available on file, _
the said claim petition holding that the h.ave:u
failed to prove that the deceased died-.dlueu'to': 4i'n;i'iilriesr
sustained by him in the roadxtraffic accident sthagt
on 27.10.1995. Being aggrievedvlllhtgf the and
award, the appellants
4. We have jviclounsel for the
appellants ant: Nos. 2 and 4.
The other unrepresented.
of lthevoriginal records available
on file the impugned judgment and
award. passed the Tiiibtlnal, it emerges that, the Tribunal
" V' '--v.haSi,_eonf;mitted anllerror in rejecting the claim petition filed
at threshold without taking into
con__sidera.tion that the appellants are entitled for
lV._compensation under 'no fault liability' as per section 140 of
"::l'M.V'."~«_Act. Taking this fact into consideration, we award a
sum of Rs.50,000/--~ to the appellants under 'no fault
yéuw
liability' as provided under section 140 of M.V. Act. Further
it emerges from para--9 of the judgment that,_
rash and negligent driving of the .
motorcycle the said accident__~~has it"
therefore, the second respondent«ébe_in'g
the motorcycle is liable to sa't--isfyV_theA.awardA
6. it is the further case'tiithe'*appe1lant.s..that due
to the injuries sustained_"bS/-.th§: in the road
traffic accident.':he_ the hosipitai
by spendiraé of towards medical
they have produced
medical-hills' ,.to. 26. The same has been
referred the A"Tri'olVunal and determined the
"V..,.,cori1per1sation fir """ '"VRs.l,28,O00/-- towards medical
r-..e>§;pense's.§ Howzever, the Tribunal has denied the same
on'-~t_he_gr'o' that the appellants have failed to prove
"that deceased died on account of the injuries sustained
in the road traffic accident. When we have
~»-izaken a View after hearing learned cousnel for the
/»>__r_.i....»..
appellants that, they are entitled for a compensation
under 'no fault liability' as provided under section:'f«ll_4Q
of MV Act, the appellants are entitled foria *
Rs.l,28,000/«~ which has been ll
expenses for the treatment of
we award a sum of Rs.l,2,€:§;0{)0/'4 Vto'Wards''~--.lVr1"1edical ''
expenses.
7 . For the foregloilngiy filed by
the appellants to
The -award passed by the
/ is hereby set aside,
awardingVVla-- «~ as compensation to
the appeliantsil with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of
' V.-petitioI1"ti1l"*its realisation.
respondent is directed to deposit the
coInpen..satiQn amount with interest within four weeks
"fiforn thedate of receipt of the copy of this judgment and
_ ' 'award.
Out of the compensation of Rs.1,78,000/~,
Rs.1,00,000/~ with proportionate interest shall "kept
in Fixed Deposit in the name of the appe11aiiVt..'1\1f:5"j1p:--., .
any Nationaliseci or Scheduied Ba.n.k__for five: "'
years and renewable for another;":.five_'years.
to her to withdraw thét._v:"1nteredstV it
periodically. '
The remaining' with
proportionate" In favour of
appeilant immediately
on deposit
Office award accordingly.
e Sdli
.....
Sdi-E Judge