IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON' BLE MR. JUSTICE L. NARAYANA SWAMY M.F.A. No.986 OF 2015 (MV) C/W M.F.A. Nos.984/2015, 985/2015, 987/2015, 988/2015, 989/2015, 990/2015, 991/2015 AND 992/2015 IN M.F.A. NO.986/2015 BETWEEN:
THE MANAGING DIRECTOR K.S.R.T.C.
KARNATAKA SARIGE BHAVAN K.H.ROAD BANGALORE – 560 027 VEHICLE NO.KA 09 F-4151 K.S.R.T.C. BUS REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER ... APPELLANT (BY SRI. F.S. DABALI, ADV.,) AND:
1. B.K. MISRIYA D/O B.H. KADHAR AGED 23 YEARS 2. B.K. ANSAR S/O B.H.KADHAR AGED 22 YEARS (STUDENT) 3. B.K. ANWAR ALI S/O B.H. KADHAR AGED 19 YEARS 4. B.K. FARANA D/O B.H. KADHAR AGED 17 YEARS 5. B.K. ANEESH S/O B.H. KADHAR AGED 15 YEARS 6. B.H. KADHAR S/O B.A. HASSAINAR AGED 45 YEARS BAKERY BUSINESS HUSBAND OF THE DECEASED RESPONDENT NO. 4 AND 5 BEING MINORS REPRESENTED BY THEIR NATURAL GUARDIAN/ FATHER - 6TH RESPONDENT ALL ARE R/O CHERIYAPARAMBU VILLAGE, NAPOKLU POST MADIKERI TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT – 571 201 7. A.M. SIRAJUDDIN S/O A.A. MOIDU OWNER OF MARUTHI OMNI BEARING NO.KA-12-P-0557 SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR’S A.S.NASEEMA W/O LATE A.M. SIRAJUDDIN AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS RESIDENT OF KONANJAGERI VILLAGE PARANE POST, MADIKERI TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT – 571 201 8. THE MANAGER BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD GE – PLAZA, AIRPORT ROAD YERAWADA, PUNE STATE MAHARASHTRA – 411 006 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. HARISH GANAPATHI, ADV., FOR C/R1 TO R6; SRI. B. PRADEEP, ADV., FOR R8; R7 SERVED) THIS M.F.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 29.10.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.25/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MACT, VIRAJPET, AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF RS.6,85,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION. IN M.F.A. NO.984/2015 BETWEEN:
THE MANAGING DIRECTOR K.S.R.T.C.
KARNATAKA SARIGE BHAVAN K.H.ROAD BANGALORE – 560 027 VEHICLE NO.KA 09 F-4151 K.S.R.T.C. BUS REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER ... APPELLANT (BY SRI. F.S. DABALI, ADV.,) AND:
1. P.H. ASHIKA D/O LATE P.M. HAREES AGED 10 YEARS 2. P.H. AFSAL S/O LATE P.M. HAREES AGED 8 YEARS 3. P.H. HAJARAH W/O LATE P.M. HAREES AGED 30 YEARS HOUSEWIFE RESPONDENT NO.1 AND 2 BEING MINORS REPRESENTED BY THEIR NATURAL GUARDIAN/ MOTHER - 3RD RESPONDENT ALL ARE R/O CHERIYAPARAMBU VILLAGE, NAPOKLU POST MADIKERI TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT – 571 201 4. A.M. SIRAJUDDIN S/O A.A. MOIDU OWNER OF MARUTHI OMNI BEARING NO.KA-12-P-0557 SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR’S A.S.NASEEMA W/O LATE A.M. SIRAJUDDIN AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS RESIDENT OF KONANJAGERI VILLAGE PARANE POST, MADIKERI TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT – 571 201 5. THE MANAGER BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD GE – PLAZA, AIRPORT ROAD YERAWADA, PUNE STATE MAHARASHTRA – 411 006 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. HARISH GANAPATHY, ADV., FOR C/R; SRI. B. PRADEEP, ADV., FOR R5; R4 SERVED) THIS M.F.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 29.10.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.21/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MACT, VIRAJPET, AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF RS.19,30,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION.
IN M.F.A. NO.985/2015 BETWEEN:
THE MANAGING DIRECTOR K.S.R.T.C.
KARNATAKA SARIGE BHAVAN K.H.ROAD BANGALORE – 560 027 VEHICLE NO.KA 09 F-4151 K.S.R.T.C. BUS REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER ... APPELLANT (BY SRI. F.S. DABALI, ADV.,) AND:
1. P.U. AJMULA D/O LATE P.M. UMMER AGED 18 YEARS 2. P.U. KADIJA W/O LATE P.M. UMMER AGED 33 YEARS HOUSEWIFE BOTH THE RESPONDENTS ARE R/O NO.89, BETHU VILLAGE NAPOKLU POST, MADIKERI TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT – 571 201 3. A.M. SIRAJUDDIN S/O A.A. MOIDU OWNER OF MARUTHI OMNI BEARING NO.KA-12-P-0557 SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR’S A.S.NASEEMA W/O LATE A.M. SIRAJUDDIN AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS RESIDENT OF KONANJAGERI VILLAGE PARANE POST, MADIKERI TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT – 571 201 4. THE MANAGER BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD GE – PLAZA, AIRPORT ROAD YERAWADA, PUNE STATE MAHARASHTRA – 411 006 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. HARISH GANAPATHY, ADV., FOR C/R1 AND R2; SRI. B. PRADEEP, ADV., FOR R4; R3 SERVED) THIS M.F.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 29.10.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.24/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MACT, VIRAJPET, AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF RS.8,50,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION.
IN M.F.A. NO.987/2015 BETWEEN:
THE MANAGING DIRECTOR K.S.R.T.C.
KARNATAKA SARIGE BHAVAN K.H.ROAD BANGALORE – 560 027 VEHICLE NO.KA 09 F-4151 K.S.R.T.C. BUS REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER ... APPELLANT (BY SRI. F.S. DABALI, ADV.,) AND:
1. P.Y. THASFIYA D/O P.M. YOUSUF AGED 14 YEARS 2. P.Y. AHAMMED MUNEER S/O P.M. YOUSUF AGED 12 YEARS 3. P.Y. AHAMMED MUKTHAR S/O P.M.YOUSUF AGED 12 YEARS 4. P.Y.THAZKIYA S/O P.M. YOUSUF AGED 7 YEARS 5. P.M.YOUSUF S/O P.M. MOHAMMED HAJI AGED 42 YEARS BUSINESS/SAUDHI ARABIA RESPONDENT NO.1 TO 4 BEING MINORS REPRESENTED BY THEIR NATURAL GUARDIAN/ FATHER – 5TH RESPONDENT ALL ARE R/O CHERIYAPARAMBU VILLAGE, NAPOKLU POST MADIKERI TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT – 571 201 6. A.M. SIRAJUDDIN S/O A.A. MOIDU OWNER OF MARUTHI OMNI BEARING NO.KA-12-P-0557 SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR’S A.S.NASEEMA W/O LATE A.M. SIRAJUDDIN AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS RESIDENT OF KONANJAGERI VILLAGE PARANE POST, MADIKERI TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT – 571 201 7. THE MANAGER BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD GE – PLAZA, AIRPORT ROAD YERAWADA, PUNE STATE MAHARASHTRA – 411 006 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. HARISH GANAPATHY, ADV., FOR C/R1 TO R5; SRI. B. PRADEEP, ADV., FOR R7; R6 SERVED) THIS M.F.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 29.10.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.26/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MACT, VIRAJPET, AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF RS.7,30,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION.
IN M.F.A. NO.988/2015 BETWEEN:
THE MANAGING DIRECTOR K.S.R.T.C.
KARNATAKA SARIGE BHAVAN K.H.ROAD BANGALORE – 560 027 VEHICLE NO.KA 09 F-4151 K.S.R.T.C. BUS REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER ... APPELLANT (BY SRI. F.S. DABALI, ADV.,) AND:
1. A.S. NAUFIYA D/O LATE A.M. SIRAJUDDIN AGE 6 YEARS SINCE MINOR REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN THE 2ND RESPONDENT A.S.NASEEMA 2. A.S. NASEEMA W/O LATE A.M. SIRAJUDDIN AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS HOUSEWIFE BOTH ARE RESIDING AT KONANJAGERI VILLAGE PARANE POST, MADIKERI TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT – 571 201 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. HARISH GANAPATHI, ADV., FOR C/R1 AND R2) THIS M.F.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 29.10.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.27/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MACT, VIRAJPET, AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF RS.10,30,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION.
IN M.F.A. NO.989/2015 BETWEEN:
THE MANAGING DIRECTOR K.S.R.T.C.
KARNATAKA SARIGE BHAVAN K.H.ROAD BANGALORE – 560 027 VEHICLE NO.KA 09 F-4151 K.S.R.T.C. BUS REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER ... APPELLANT (BY SRI. F.S. DABALI, ADV.,) AND:
1. P.Y. THAZKIYA D/O P.M.YOUSUF AGED 7 YEARS 2. P.M. YOUSUF S/O P.B. MOHAMMED HAJI AGED 42 YEARS RESPONDENT NO.1 BEING MINOR REPRESENTED BY HER NATURAL GUARDIAN/ FATHER – THE 2ND RESPONDENT BOTH THE RESPONDENTS ARE R/O CHERIYAPARAMBU VILLAGE, NAPOKLU POST MADIKERI TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT – 571 201 3. A.M. SIRAJUDDIN S/O A.A. MOIDU OWNER OF MARUTHI OMNI BEARING NO.KA-12-P-0557 SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR’S A.S.NASEEMA W/O LATE A.M. SIRAJUDDIN AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS RESIDENT OF KONANJAGERI VILLAGE PARANE POST, MADIKERI TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT – 571 201 4. THE MANAGER BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD GE – PLAZA, AIRPORT ROAD YERAWADA, PUNE STATE MAHARASHTRA – 411 006 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. HARISH GANAPATHI, ADV., FOR R1 AND R2; R1 IS MINOR REPRESENTED BY R2;
SRI. B. PRADEEP, ADV., FOR R4; R3 SERVED) THIS M.F.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 29.10.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.19/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MACT, VIRAJPET, AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF RS.2,84,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION.
IN M.F.A. NO.990/2015 BETWEEN:
THE MANAGING DIRECTOR K.S.R.T.C.
KARNATAKA SARIGE BHAVAN K.H.ROAD BANGALORE – 560 027 VEHICLE NO.KA 09 F-4151 K.S.R.T.C. BUS REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER ... APPELLANT (BY SRI. F.S. DABALI, ADV.,) AND:
1. P.M. IBRAHIM S/O P.B. MOHAMMED HAJI, AGE 33 YEARS BAKERY BUSINESS R/O CHERIYAPARAMBU VILLAGE, NAPOKLU POST MADIKERI TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT – 571 201 2. A.M. SIRAJUDDIN S/O A.A. MOIDU OWNER OF MARUTHI OMNI BEARING NO.KA-12-P-0557 SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR’S A.S.NASEEMA W/O LATE A.M. SIRAJUDDIN AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS RESIDENT OF KONANJAGERI VILLAGE PARANE POST, MADIKERI TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT – 571 201 3. THE MANAGER BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD GE – PLAZA, AIRPORT ROAD YERAWADA, PUNE STATE MAHARASHTRA – 411 006 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. HARISH GANAPATHI, ADV., FOR R2;
SRI. B. PRADEEP, ADV., FOR R3; R2 SERVED) THIS M.F.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 29.10.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.20/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MACT, VIRAJPET, AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF RS.1,73,640/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION. IN M.F.A. NO.991/2015 BETWEEN:
THE MANAGING DIRECTOR K.S.R.T.C.
KARNATAKA SARIGE BHAVAN K.H.ROAD BANGALORE – 560 027 VEHICLE NO.KA 09 F-4151 K.S.R.T.C. BUS REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER ... APPELLANT (BY SRI. F.S. DABALI, ADV.,) AND:
1. MOHAMMED FARIS @ SALMAN FARIS S/O P.M. IBRAHIM AGED ABOUT 6 YEARS 2. P.M. IBRAHIM S/O P.B. MOHAMMED HAJI AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS OCCUPATION: BUSINESS RESPONDENT NO.1 SON BEING MINOR REPRESENTED BY HIS NATURAL GUARDIAN/ FATHER – 2ND RESPONDENT BOTH ARE R/O CHERIYAPARAMBU VILLAGE, NAPOKLU POST MADIKERI TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT – 571 201 3. A.M. SIRAJUDDIN S/O A.A. MOIDU OWNER OF MARUTHI OMNI BEARING NO.KA-12-P-0557 SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR’S A.S.NASEEMA W/O LATE A.M. SIRAJUDDIN AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS RESIDENT OF KONANJAGERI VILLAGE PARANE POST, MADIKERI TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT – 571 201 4. THE MANAGER BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD GE – PLAZA, AIRPORT ROAD YERAWADA, PUNE STATE MAHARASHTRA – 411 006 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. HARISH GANAPATHI, ADV., FOR R2; (R1 MINOR, REPRESENTED BY R2) SRI. B. PRADEEP, ADV., FOR R4; R3 SERVED) THIS M.F.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 29.10.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.22/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MACT, VIRAJPET, AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF RS.2,34,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION. IN M.F.A. NO.992/2015 BETWEEN:
THE MANAGING DIRECTOR K.S.R.T.C.
KARNATAKA SARIGE BHAVAN K.H.ROAD BANGALORE – 560 027 VEHICLE NO.KA 09 F-4151 K.S.R.T.C. BUS REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER ... APPELLANT (BY SRI. F.S. DABALI, ADV.,) AND:
1. V.K. ANSAR S/O B.H. KADHAR AGED 22 YEARS STUDENT R/O CHERIYAPARAMBU VILLAGE, NAPOKLU POST MADIKERI TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT – 571 201 2. A.M. SIRAJUDDIN S/O A.A. MOIDU OWNER OF MARUTHI OMNI BEARING NO.KA-12-P-0557 SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR’S A.S.NASEEMA W/O LATE A.M. SIRAJUDDIN AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS RESIDENT OF KONANJAGERI VILLAGE PARANE POST, MADIKERI TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT – 571 201 3. THE MANAGER BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD GE – PLAZA, AIRPORT ROAD YERAWADA, PUNE STATE MAHARASHTRA – 411 006 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. HARISH GANAPATHI, ADV., FOR R1;
SRI. B. PRADEEP, ADV., FOR R3; R2 SERVED) THIS M.F.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 29.10.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.28/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MACT, VIRAJPET, AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF RS.34,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION.
THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING JUDGMENT MFA No.986/2015:
This appeal is filed by the KSRTC challenging the award of compensation by the Tribunal to the claimants/ respondents.
2. In this case, the respondent Nos.1 to 6 who are the children and husband of the deceased B H Aisamma filed a claim petition contending that when the deceased was traveling in a Maruthi Van along with others near Mugutageri village, the bus coming from opposite direction negligently dashed against the Maruthi Van, due to which, she died on the spot. It was further contended that the deceased was working as a coolie. The Tribunal awarded the compensation of Rs.7,35,000/- to the claimants/ respondents. Being aggrieved by the same, the KSRTC has filed this appeal.
3. It is the contention of the KSRTC that the Maruthi Car and Indica Car which were coming from the opposite direction for chasing one another and by seeing the said vehicles the bus was taken towards left side, as the Maruthi car was overloaded and lost control, dashed against the bus and due to the entire negligent of the driver of the Maruthi van, the accident took place and hence the claim petition is liable to be dismissed.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents sought to support the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal.
5. I have gone through the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal considering all the material available on record awarded compensation of Rs.7,35,000/-. The Tribunal has also held that the appellant has not proved the negligence on the part of the driver of the Maruthi van. Hence, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper and does not call for interference by this Court.
Accordingly, appeal is dismissed.
The amount in deposit shall be transferred to the concerned Tribunal for payment.
M.F.A. No.984/2015:
This appeal is filed by the KSRTC challenging the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal in awarding compensation of Rs.19,80,000/-.
2. In this case, the respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3 who are the children and wife of the deceased P M Harees filed a claim petition contending that when the deceased was traveling in a Maruthi Van along with others near Mugutageri village, the bus coming from opposite direction negligently dashed against the Maruthi Van, due to which, he died on the spot. It was further contended that the deceased was working as car driver in Saudi Arabia. The Tribunal awarded the compensation of Rs.19,80,000/- to the claimants/respondents. Being aggrieved by the same, the KSRTC has filed this appeal.
3. It is the contention of the KSRTC that the Maruthi Car and Indica Car which were coming from the opposite direction for chasing one another and by seeing the said vehicles the bus was taken towards left side, as the Maruthi car was overloaded and lost control, dashed against the bus and due to the entire negligent of the driver of the Maruthi van, the accident took place and hence the claim petition is liable to be dismissed.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents sought to support the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal.
5. I have gone through the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal considering all the material available on record awarded compensation of Rs.19,80,000/-. The Tribunal has also held that the appellant has not proved the negligence on the part of the driver of the Maruthi van. Hence, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper and does not call for interference by this Court.
Accordingly, appeal is dismissed.
The amount in deposit shall be transferred to the concerned Tribunal for payment.
M.F.A. No.985/2015 This appeal is filed by the KSRTC challenging the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal in awarding compensation of Rs.9,00,000/-.
2. In this case, the respondent Nos.1 and 2 who are the daughter and wife of the deceased P M Ummer filed a claim petition contending that when the deceased was traveling in a Maruthi Van along with others near Mugutageri village, the bus coming from opposite direction negligently dashed against the Maruthi Van, due to which, he died on the spot. It was further contended that the deceased was as Timber merchant. The Tribunal awarded the compensation of Rs.9,00,000/- to the claimants/respondents. Being aggrieved by the same, the KSRTC has filed this appeal.
3. It is the contention of the KSRTC that the Maruthi Car and Indica Car which were coming from the opposite direction for chasing one another and by seeing the said vehicles the bus was taken towards left side, as the Maruthi car was overloaded and lost control, dashed against the bus and due to the entire negligent of the driver of the Maruthi van, the accident took place and hence the claim petition is liable to be dismissed.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents sought to support the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal.
5. I have gone through the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal considering all the material available on record awarded compensation of Rs.9,00,000/-. The Tribunal has also held that the appellant has not proved the negligence on the part of the driver of the Maruthi van. Hence, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper and does not call for interference by this Court.
Accordingly, appeal is dismissed.
The amount in deposit shall be transferred to the concerned Tribunal for payment.
M.F.A. No.987/2015, This appeal is filed by the KSRTC challenging the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal in awarding compensation of Rs.7,80,000/-.
2. In this case, the respondent Nos.1 to 5 herein who are the children and husband of the deceased P Y Safiya Yousuf filed a claim petition contending that when the deceased was traveling in a Maruthi Van along with others near Mugutageri village, the bus coming from opposite direction negligently dashed against the Maruthi Van, due to which, he died on the spot. It was further contended that the deceased was housewife. The Tribunal awarded the compensation of Rs.7,80,000/- to the claimants/respondents. Being aggrieved by the same, the KSRTC has filed this appeal.
3. It is the contention of the KSRTC that the Maruthi Car and Indica Car which were coming from the opposite direction for chasing one another and by seeing the said vehicles the bus was taken towards left side, as the Maruthi car was overloaded and lost control, dashed against the bus and due to the entire negligent of the driver of the Maruthi van, the accident took place and hence the claim petition is liable to be dismissed.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents sought to support the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal.
5. I have gone through the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal considering all the material available on record awarded compensation of Rs.7,80,000/-. The Tribunal has also held that the appellant has not proved the negligence on the part of the driver of the Maruthi van. Hence, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper and does not call for interference by this Court.
Accordingly, appeal is dismissed.
The amount in deposit shall be transferred to the concerned Tribunal for payment.
M.F.A. No.988/2015:
This appeal is filed by the KSRTC challenging the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal in awarding compensation of Rs.10,80,000/-.
2. In this case, the respondent Nos.1 and 2 herein who are the daughter and wife of the deceased A M Sirajuddin filed a claim petition contending that when the deceased was traveling in a Maruthi Van along with others near Mugutageri village, the bus coming from opposite direction negligently dashed against the Maruthi Van, due to which, he died on the spot. It was further contended that the deceased was doing business. The Tribunal awarded the compensation of Rs.10,80,000/- to the claimants/respondents. Being aggrieved by the same, the KSRTC has filed this appeal.
3. It is the contention of the KSRTC that the Maruthi Car and Indica Car which were coming from the opposite direction for chasing one another and by seeing the said vehicles the bus was taken towards left side, as the Maruthi car was overloaded and lost control, dashed against the bus and due to the entire negligent of the driver of the Maruthi van, the accident took place and hence the claim petition is liable to be dismissed.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents sought to support the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal.
5. I have gone through the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal considering all the material available on record awarded compensation of Rs.10,80,000/-. The Tribunal has also held that the appellant has not proved the negligence on the part of the driver of the Maruthi van. Hence, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper and does not call for interference by this Court.
Accordingly, appeal is dismissed.
The amount in deposit shall be transferred to the concerned Tribunal for payment.
M.F.A. No.989/2015:
This appeal is filed by the KSRTC challenging the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal in awarding compensation of Rs.2,99,000/-.
2. In this case, the 1st respondent herein filed a claim petition contending that when she was traveling in a Maruthi Van along with others near Mugutageri village, the bus coming from opposite direction negligently dashed, due to which, she sustained injuries. The Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.2,99,000/-. Being aggrieved by the same, the KSRTC has filed this appeal.
3. It is the contention of the KSRTC that the Maruthi Car and Indica Car which were coming from the opposite direction for chasing one another and by seeing the said vehicles the bus was taken towards left side, as the Maruthi car was overloaded and lost control, dashed against the bus and due to the entire negligent of the driver of the Maruthi van, the accident took place and hence the claim petition is liable to be dismissed.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent sought to support the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal.
5. I have gone through the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal considering all the materials available on record awarded compensation of Rs.2,99,000/-. The Tribunal has also held that the appellant has not proved the negligence on the part of the driver of the Maruthi van. Hence, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper and does not call for interference by this Court.
Accordingly, appeal is dismissed.
The amount in deposit shall be transferred to the concerned Tribunal for payment.
M.F.A. No.990/2015:
This appeal is filed by the KSRTC challenging the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal in awarding compensation of Rs.1,88,640/-.
2. In this case, the respondent herein filed a claim petition contending that when he was traveling in a Maruthi Van along with others near Mugutageri village, the bus coming from opposite direction negligently dashed, due to which, he sustained injuries. The Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.1,88,640/-. Being aggrieved by the same, the KSRTC has filed this appeal.
3. It is the contention of the KSRTC that the Maruthi Car and Indica Car which were coming from the opposite direction for chasing one another and by seeing the said vehicles the bus was taken towards left side, as the Maruthi car was overloaded and lost control, dashed against the bus and due to the entire negligent of the driver of the Maruthi van, the accident took place and hence the claim petition is liable to be dismissed.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent sought to support the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal.
5. I have gone through the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal considering all the materials available on record awarded compensation of Rs.1,88,640/-. The Tribunal has also held that the appellant has not proved the negligence on the part of the driver of the Maruthi van. Hence, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper and does not call for interference by this Court.
Accordingly, appeal is dismissed.
The amount in deposit shall be transferred to the concerned Tribunal for payment.
M.F.A. No.991/2015:
This appeal is filed by the KSRTC challenging the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal in awarding compensation of Rs.2,49,000/-.
2. In this case, the respondent herein filed a claim petition contending that when he was traveling in a Maruthi Van along with others near Mugutageri village, the bus coming from opposite direction negligently dashed, due to which, he sustained injuries. The Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.2,99,000/-. Being aggrieved by the same, the KSRTC has filed this appeal.
3. It is the contention of the KSRTC that the Maruthi Car and Indica Car which were coming from the opposite direction for chasing one another and by seeing the said vehicles the bus was taken towards left side, as the Maruthi car was overloaded and lost control, dashed against the bus and due to the entire negligent of the driver of the Maruthi van, the accident took place and hence the claim petition is liable to be dismissed.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent sought to support the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal.
5. I have gone through the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal considering all the materials available on record awarded compensation of Rs.2,49,000/-. The Tribunal has also held that the appellant has not proved the negligence on the part of the driver of the Maruthi van. Hence, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper and does not call for interference by this Court.
Accordingly, appeal is dismissed.
The amount in deposit shall be transferred to the concerned Tribunal for payment.
M.F.A. No.992/2015:
This appeal is filed by the KSRTC challenging the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal in awarding compensation of Rs.49,000/-.
2. In this case, the respondent herein filed a claim petition contending that when he was traveling in a Maruthi Van along with others near Mugutageri village, the bus coming from opposite direction negligently dashed, due to which, he sustained injuries. The Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.49,000/-. Being aggrieved by the same, the KSRTC has filed this appeal.
3. It is the contention of the KSRTC that the Maruthi Car and Indica Car which were coming from the opposite direction for chasing one another and by seeing the said vehicles the bus was taken towards left side, as the Maruthi car was overloaded and lost control, dashed against the bus and due to the entire negligent of the driver of the Maruthi van, the accident took place and hence the claim petition is liable to be dismissed.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent sought to support the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal.
5. I have gone through the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal considering all the materials available on record awarded compensation of Rs.49,000/-. The Tribunal has also held that the appellant has not proved the negligence on the part of the driver of the Maruthi van. Hence, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper and does not call for interference by this Court.
Accordingly, appeal is dismissed.
The amount in deposit shall be transferred to the concerned Tribunal for payment.
The amount mentioned in these appeals as award of compensation does not include the amount already paid to the claimants.
Sd/- JUDGE Nm