IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.SUDHINDRARAO M.F.A.No.2660/2019(MV) BETWEEN:
THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER KSRTC, HAVERI DIVISION HAVERI NOW REPRESENTED BY NORTH WESTERN KARNATAKA ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION CENTRAL OFFICE, HUBLI NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER CENTRAL OFFICE HUBLI ..APPELLANT (BY SMT. S NIRMMALA, ADVOCATE) AND:
1 . M V MAHESH AGED 57 YEARS LATE M B VEERABADRAPPA BASAPPA EXTENSION, BIRUR TOWN KADUR TALUK CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT.
2 . YUNUS MULLA AGED 52 YEARS S/O ABDUL MUSHAEED MULLA DRIVER KSRTC BUS BADGE No.542, 13/7/2017 (T.R.) HIREKERUR TOWN HIREKERUR TALUK HAVERI DISTRICT.
3 . THE DEPOT MANAGER, K.S.R.T.C HIREKERUR TOWN HIREKERUR TALUK HAVERI DISTRICT.
4 . MANAGING DIRECTOR KSRTC, CENTRAL OFFICE, SHANTHINAGARA (OWNER OF THE BUS BEARING REG. No.KA/27/F-0580) BANGALORE – 560 001.
..RESPONDENTS THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173 (1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 04.12.2018, PASSED IN MVC No.345/2016, ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, KADUR, CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF Rs.5,46,216/- WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 7% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT Though the appeal is listed for orders on I.A., in the nature and circumstances of the case I.A.1/2019 is allowed. Delay of 13 days in filing the appeal is condoned. The matter is taken up for final disposal.
Appeal is directed against the Judgment and award dated 04.12.2018 passed in MVC No.345/2016 by the Senior Civil Judge, MACT, Kadur, Chikkamagalur District, wherein claim petition came to be allowed in part and compensation of Rs.5,46,216/- with interest at the rate of 7% p.a. from the date of petition till its realisation came to be granted to the petitioner. Being aggrieved by the said Judgment and award Corporation has preferred this appeal.
2. In order to avoid confusion and overlapping, parties are referred to as per their rankings before the Tribunal.
3. The details relating to accident is that on 27.08.2015 when the petitioner-Mahesh was riding his Hero Honda Splendor Plus bike bearing registration No.KA-18/R-5886 and proceeding towards Kadur from Birur on the left side of NH-206, while going so near tiles factory on NH-206 at about 3.00 P.M KSRTC bus bearing registration No.KA-25/F-580 driven by first respondent in a rash and negligent manner dashed to the bike from its back side. Because of the impact petitioner fell down and sustained injuries. Learned Member on considering the injuries, disability and other aspects granted compensation.
4. Total compensation granted by the Tribunal is as under:
5. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the corporation that contributory negligence is not considered by the Tribunal.
6. Smt.Nirmmala, learned counsel appearing for appellant-KSRTC would submit that the damage caused to the vehicle of the claimant shows that rear portion rubber rubbed mark and nearby body slightly scratched clearly shows that the rider of the motorcycle tried to overtake the bus from the left side of the bus and dashed to the bus and petitioner has claimed that bus dashed against his vehicle. On the other hand damage to the vehicle goes to show on the front side indicate that petitioner was negligent and learned Member should have assessed on the aspect of contributory negligence to a partial accident if not total accident.
7. Age of the petitioner is stated to be 56 years as on the date of the accident and he is stated to be a Class-I electrical contractor earning Rs.22,000/- per month. Considering all these aspects the disability to the right eye is considered at 40% and he is stated to have admitted to the hospital on 27.08.2015 and discharged on 01.09.2015. Negligence is a breach of legal duty to take care of oneself and also others. Here presentation of the complaint cannot be a conclusive aspect. The matter has to be adjudicated considering all the available and relevant materials and the attending circumstances. In this connection one of the aspects is that a criminal case is also registered against the driver of the bus.
8. In the background of the said facts I find the compensation of Rs.5,46,216/- together with interest at the rate of 7% p.a. is not excessive. From the angle of the total consideration it is just and fair. Thus, considering the injuries, disability, the proportionate amount which the claimant is entitled as a global compensation also justifies the Judgment and award of the learned Member. On going through award and reasons assigned I do not find reasons for further proceedings in the case.
Appeal is rejected.
The appellant-corporation is directed to pay the balance compensation if any together with interest @ 7% p.a. within four weeks from today.
Amount in deposit to be transmitted to the Tribunal.
Sd/- JUDGE SBN