IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR MFA NO. 5381 OF 2016 (MV) CONNECTED WITH MFA NO.5923 OF 2016 (MV) IN MFA NO. 5381 OF 2016:
BETWEEN M/S ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd., Regional office No.98, SVR Complex 2nd floor, Hosur Main road, Madiwala, Bangalore Now rep by it legal manager M/s ICICI Lombard GIC Ltd., Regional office The estate, 9th Floor Dickenson road M.G. Road, Bangalore – 42. ... Appellant (By Sri. B.C. Shivanne Gowda, Advocate) AND 1. Anwar S/o Late Kutti Mohamad Aged about 52 years 2. Smt. Wahida W/o Anwar Aged about 43 years 3. Kum. Taslim D/o Anwar Aged about 22 years 4. Kum. Ruskar D/o Anwar Aged about 16 years 5. Kum. Jameela D/o Anwar Aged about 13 years 6. Kum. Ayesha D/o Anwar Aged about 9 Years The respondent no. 4 t 6 are minor Rep by their father i.e., 1st respondent, All are R/at A.K. Gopalan colony Channasandra, Kadugodi Bangalore – 67.
Now residing at Koralur village Nadavathi post, Hoskote taluk Bangalore district.
7. Gandhi S/o Rathnam Naidu Major R/at Mukundapalli village Hosur taluk, Krishnagiri district Tamil Nadu state. ... Respondents (By Sri.Shripad.V. Shastri and Sri K.V. Naik Advocate for R-1, 2 and R-3) This MFA is filed under Section 173(1) of MV Act against the judgment and award dated 18.4.2016 passed in MVC No. 218/13 on the file of the 8th Additional district and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural district, Bengaluru, Awarding compensation of Rs.11,94,000/- with interest at 8% p.a. from the date of petition till date of deposit.
IN MFA NO. 5923 OF 2016: BETWEEN 1. Sri Anwar S/o Late Kutti Mohamad Aged about 52 years 2. Smt. Vahida W/o Anwar Aged about 43 years 3. Kum. Taslim D/o Anwar Aged about 22 years 4. Kum. Ruskar D/o Anwar Aged about 16 years 5. Kum. Jameela D/o Anwar Aged about 13 years 6. Kum. Ayesha D/o Anwar Aged about 9 Years Appellant Nos. 4 to 6 since minor Rep by their father and Natural guardian Appellant No.1 Sri Anwar Appellants are residing at A.K. Gopalan Colony Channasandra, Kadugodi Bangalore – 560 067.
Now residing at Koralur village Nadavathi post, Hoskote taluk Bangalore District-562114. ... Appellants (By Sri. Shripad V. Shastri, Advocate) AND 1. Sri Gandhi Major in age S/o Rathnam Naidu R/at Mukundapalli Village Hosur taluk, Krishnagiri (D) Tamil Nadu State.
2. The Legal Manager ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd., No.68, 2nd Cross, S.V.R. Plaza, Hosur Road Madiwala, Bengaluru-68 By its Manager. ... Respondents (By Sri.B.C. Shivanne Gowda Advocate for R-2 Notice to R-1 dispensed with) This MFA is filed under Section 173(1) of MV Act against the judgment and award dated 18.4.2016 passed in MVC No. 218/13 on the file of the 8th Additional district and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural district, Bengaluru, partly allowing the claim petition for compensation and seeking enhancement of compensation.
These MFAs coming on for Hearing, this day, the Court delivered the following:
JUDGMENT Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the respondents respectively in both these appeals.
2. The factual matrix of the appeals is as follows: It is stated that on 08.07.2013 at about 6.00 p.m.
near Samethanahalli, NH 207, Chikkathirupathi – Hosakote road, deceased Harshad was riding a scooter bearing Regn. No.KA-03-V-5741 along with a pillion rider by name Murali, on the left side of the road carefully and cautiously. But however, a bolero goods jeep bearing Regn. No.KA-51-9892 which was coming from the opposite side was driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner and dashed to the scooter and caused the accident. As a result, the rider and pillion rider fell down and sustained grievous injuries. But however, the rider Harshad was declared brought dead. The injured namely Murali was shifted to Vydehi hospital and provided treatment. Hence, claim petitions were filed before the concerned Tribunal by the legal representatives of the deceased Harshad seeking compensation owing to the death of the rider of the vehicle and by the claimant Murali seeking compensation for the injuries sustained by him in the accident. The Tribunal on hearing the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and on appreciating the entire evidence on record, by its common judgment, has awarded compensation to the respective claimants.
3. The appeal in MFA.No.5381/2016 has been filed by the Insurance Company challenging the liability as well as the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal in respect of the legal representatives of the deceased. The connected appeal in MFA.No.5823/2016 has been filed by the legal representatives of the deceased Anwar seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
4. But however, in MFA.No.5381/2016, learned counsel for the Insurance Company – Appellant and the learned counsel for the respondents have filed a Compromise petition under Order 23 Rule 3 read with Section 151 of CPC seeking to settle the matter in terms of the compromise memo.
5. As per the terms of the compromise, the appellant – Insurance Company and Respondents 1 to 6 (legal heirs of deceased Harshad) have agreed to settle the matter amicably for a sum of Rs.11,94,000/- with interest at 6% per annum as against the award of Rs.11,94,000/- with interest at 8% per annum granted by the Tribunal, in full and final satisfaction of the claim. Hence, the learned counsel pray that the appeal filed by the claimants is liable to the dismissed and the appeal filed by the company is to be partly allowed in terms of the compromise.
The compromise is duly signed by the learned counsel for both the parties. Hence, the said Compromise petition dated 06.02.2019 is taken on record.
6. Consequently, the appeal in MFA No.5381/2016 is partly allowed in terms of the compromise.
The appeal in MFA No.5923/2016 filed by the claimants, is hereby rejected.
The amount in deposit if any in MFA No.5381/2016 shall be transmitted to the concerned Tribunal forthwith, along with the LCR.
There shall be no order as to costs. Office to draw a decree accordingly.
SD/- JUDGE KS