IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.SREENIVASE GOWDA MFA NO.9622/2010 (MV) BETWEEN:
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD MUDDAPPA COMPELX, SHRIRANI ROAD, TUMKUR NOW REP. BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LD., REGIONAL OFFICE, SUBHARAM COMPLEX, 144, M.G.ROAD, BANGALORE-560001 ... APPELLANT (BY SRI A N KRISHNA SWAMY, ADV.) AND 1. PARAVEEZ S/O LATE ABDUL SATTAR FRUIT SELLING BUSINESS 10TH CROSS NEAR GOVERNMENT SCHOL BADDIHALLI TUMKUR.
2. NAGESH S/O RAMAKRISHNAIAH R/O AREGUJJANAHALLI URDIGERE HOBLI TUMKUR TALUK.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PATEL D KAREGOWDA, ADV. FOR R1 R2 SERVED) MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:30.03.2010 PASSED IN MVC NO.1061/2007 ON THE FILE OF PRESIDING OFFICER, FAST TRACK COURT-III, MACT, TUMKUR, AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF RS.70,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL PAYMENT.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the insurer of a Tractor bearing Reg. No. KA-06-A-5283, challenging the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal in MVC No. 1061/2007, both on the ground of negligence as well as liability.
2. Sri.Patel D Karegowda, learned counsel for the respondent No.1-(claimant) submits that in the very accident occurred on 17.5.2007 due to rash and negligent driving of the offending tractor bearing registration No.KA-06-A-5283, two persons namely Parveez (claimant in the instant appeal) and another person namely Siddesh had sustained bodily injuries and they filed two seperate claim petitions. MVC 869/2007 filed by the injured Siddesh before the MACT, Tumkur was allowed and claimant was awarded certain sum of compensation and the appellant was directed to deposit the compensation amount. He submits that the insurer aggrieved by the said judgment and award of the Tribunal challenged the same by preferring MFA 6738/2008 before this court on the ground that the said judgment and award was passed without providing an opportunity to the insurer. This court allowed the said appeal and remanded the matter to the Tribunal for reconsideration. After remand, the Tribunal has reconsidered the matter and allowed the claim petition and awarded compensation and directed the insurer to deposit the compensation amount. Further, the claimant in the said case being aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, had filed MFA 435/2013 before this court and this court has allowed the said appeal by enhancing the compensation awarded by the Tribunal without disturbing the finding of the Tribunal on negligence and liability. Therefore, he submits that this appeal preferred by the insurer disputing the very same accident by involvement of the offending tractor does not survive for consideration. Therefore, he prays for dismissal of the appeal.
3. Sri A.N.Krishna Swamy, learned counsel for the insurer of the tractor does not dispute the above facts. If that is so, the above appeal filed by the insurer of the offending tractor challenging the occurrence of accident by involvement of the offending tractor does not survive for consideration.
4. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. The amount in deposit is ordered to be transferred to the Tribunal for disbursement in favour of the claimant in terms of the award of the Tribunal.
No order as to costs.
SD/- JUDGE