IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.K.SUDHINDRARAO MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL No.6036/2010 (MV) BETWEEN K.P.HEMARAJ S/O PUTTASWAMY GOWDA AGE: 29 YEARS OCC: COOLIE R/O BEDAVATTI VILLAGE POST BELAVANI SORAB TALUK SHIMOGA DISTRICT ... APPELLANT (By Sri S. RAJENDRA FOR Sri S.V.PRAKASH, ADVOCATE) AND 1. VEERENDRA KUMAR S/O BASAPPA GOWDA AGE 30 YEARS OCC: AGRICULTURIST R/O SAMPAGODU VILLAGE SORAB TALUK SHIMOGA DISTRICT (RIDER OF HERO HONDA MOTOR BIKE BEARING REG.NO.KA 15 J 8118 2. M/s.UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED J.C.ROAD, SAGAR TALUK SHIMOGA DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER ... RESPONDENTS (By Sri RAVISH BENNI, ADVOCATE FOR R2 R1 SERVED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:10.7.2008 PASSED IN MVC NO.51/2007 ON THE FILE OF CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN.) & ADDITIONAL MACT, SORAB, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the claimant seeking enhancement of compensation against the judgment and award dated 10.07.2008 passed in MVC No.51/2007 on the file of Civil Judge (Sr.Dn) & Addl. MACT, Sorab, wherein the learned Member had granted compensation of Rs.1,27,393/- together with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till payment and directed the first respondent, the owner of the vehicle to deposit the same.
2. The incident that led to initiation of proceedings is that on 14.05.2002, at about 2-30 p.m, the appellant/petitioner being the pillion rider of Hero Honda motor bike bearing Regn. No.KA-15-J-8118 was coming from Shiralkoppa to Sorab, the first respondent was driving the said vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and dashed to one B.N.Sathyanaika, who was coming from office to house on the road. As a result of the said impact, he sustained injury.
3. Upon presentation of claim petition by the appellant/petitioner, second respondent-Insurance Company contested the same by denying all the averments made in the petition. The learned Member has disposed of the matter by allowing the petition in part and an amount of Rs.1,27,393/- was awarded.
The learned Member has awarded the compensation under different heads as under:
Sl.No. Particulars Amount in Rs.
1. Medical treatment 10,593/-
2. Other expenses 2,000/-
3. Pain and sufferings 25,000/-
4. Loss of amenities, comfort etc 25,000/-
5. Loss of future income due to disability 64,800/-
Total 1,27,393/-
together with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till payment. However, first respondent- owner has directed to deposit the amount and the petition against respondent No.2 is dismissed. The same is challenged by the claimant both on the quantum of compensation and fastening liability on the first respondent, owner and exonerating the Insurance Company. The learned Member has assigned reasons at paragraph No.16 are as under:
“16. I have gone through the principles laid down in this ruling is not applicable to the defence of the petitioner, admittedly, the petitioner is pillion rider of the bike, the owner of the vehicle has not paid extra premium of the pillion rider. Therefore, the insurance company is not liable to pay any compensation. Hence, the owner of the vehicle is liable to pay the compensation to the petitioner.”
4. The Insurance Company or the owner have not filed the Insurance policy to come to the conclusion that additional premium was not paid and it does not make out as to what was the force for the learned Member to come to a finding as stated in paragraph No.16 despite the policy being not available in the record. It appears to be pre-judged or hurried conclusion and liable to be set aside and the matter requires to be remanded for reconsideration.
5. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. The judgment and award dated 10.07.2008 passed in MVC No.51/2007 on the file of Civil Judge (Sr.Dn) & Addl. MACT, Sorab, is set aside. The matter is remanded to the Tribunal with a direction to the second respondent-
Insurance Company to produce the Insurance Policy, if any, for the offending vehicle. Peruse the same regarding the applicability of the same for the purpose of the present case and dispose of the matter within three months from the first date of hearing after remand.
cp* Sd/- JUDGE