IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE Mr. JUSTICE L.NARAYANA SWAMY M.F.A. NO. 4891/2015 (MV) BETWEEN:
1. THIPPERUDRAPPA, S/O THIPPAIAH, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, 2. MANJAMMA, W/O THIPPERUDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, 3. TRIVENI T., D/O THIPPERUDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, 4. PAVITHRA T., D/O THIPPERUDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, 5. RAMESH @ RAMU T., S/O THIPPERUDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, ALL ARE R/O RAMAJOGIHALLI, CHALLAKERE TALUK.
NOW R/AT 4TH CROSS, JOGIMATTI ROAD, CHITRADURGA – 577 501.
(BY SRI. VIRUPAKSHAIAH P.H., ADV.) AND:
1. SAIFULLA, S/O BASHA SAB, MAJOR, OWNER OF MINI LORRY BEARING … APPELLANTS NO. KA 11 1768 R/O 1ST CROSS, CHELUGUDDA, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT – 577 501.
2. THE MANAGER, SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., E-8, EPIP, RIICO, SITAPUR, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN – 302 000.
… RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. O. MAHESH, ADV. FOR R2.
SRI. M.J. JAGAN MOHAN, ADV. FOR R1.) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 13.4.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO. 574/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, 4TH MACT, CHITRADURGA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-
J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred by the parents, brother and sisters of the deceased Hanumanthappa, who died in a road traffic accident that occurred on 25.04.2012, seeking enhancement in the compensation and also challenging the liability fastened on the owner of the offending lorry.
2. The occurrence of accident, involving the offending lorry bearing No. KA-11-1768, rash and negligent driving of its driver and its insurance coverage are not in dispute.
3. By the impugned Judgment and award dated. 13.04.2015 passed in MVC. No.574/2012, on the file of the 1st Additional Senior Civil Judge and MACT., Chitradurga, the Tribunal awarded total compensation of Rs.8,91,500/- with interest at 8% per annum from the date of petition till date of payment. However, the Tribunal exonerated the 2nd respondent-insurer to pay the compensation and fastened/saddled the liability on the owner of the offending lorry, solely on the ground that the owner of the vehicle has failed to produce the permit, fitness certificate, registration certificate and driving licence held by the driver of the lorry.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant has filed application (IA-1/2015) under Order-41, Rule-27 of the Code of Civil Procedure, seeking permission to produce (i) driving licence, (ii) registration certificate of the offending vehicle (iii) fitness certificate of the offending vehicle and (iv) permit in respect of the lorry bearing No.KA-11/1768.
5. Shri. O.Mahesh, learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent-insurer strongly opposed the said application.
6. The claimants-appellants have lost their son who died in the accident. Hence, after hearing the learned counsel for the respective parties, this Court is of the considered view that interest of justice would be met, if the matter is remitted back to the Tribunal for fresh consideration. Hence, the following:
O R D E R The appeal is allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award dated. 13.04.2015 passed by the I Additional Senior Civil Judge and MACT., Chitradurga in MVC. No. 574/2012 is set aside. The matter is remitted back to the Tribunal for fresh consideration. Liberty is granted to the appellants- claimants to file appropriate application before the Tribunal for production of additional documents which are sought to be produced in this appeal. The Tribunal shall consider the matter afresh, after affording opportunity to both the parties to lead additional evidence if any. Both the parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 20.11.1017, without awaiting notice from the Tribunal.
Office is directed to return the original documents produced by the appellants along with IA- 1/2015. In view of the disposal of the main appeal, IA-1/2015 filed for production of additional documents does not survive for consideration and the same shall stand disposed of.
No order as to costs.
Sd/-
JUDGE VR