IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S. DIXIT M.F.A.NO.2214 OF 2011 (MV) C/W M.F.A.NO.2213 OF 2011 (MV) IN M.F.A.NO.2214 OF 2011:
BETWEEN:
SRI.J.NAGARAJ, SON OF CHIKKAMUNIYAPPA, AGED 45 YEARS, THIMMARAYASWAMY NILAYA, HOUSE NO.104, BOMMENAHALLI VILLAGE, VEERGONAGAR POST, BIDRAHALLI HOBLI, BANGALORE EAST TALUK, BANGALORE-560 049. ... APPELLANT (BY SRI.B. SHARATH KUMAR, ADVOCATE) AND 1. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., BANGALORE, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, SRI.HARI COMPLEX, HARSHA MAHAL ROAD, HASSAN-573 201.
2. S.P. KIRAN KUMAR, SON OF K.V. PARAMESHA, MAJOR IN AGE, RAVIDHARSHANA NILAYA, KAISHA SARDAR, TUMKUR-572 101.
3. SRI. RAGHAVENDRA, SON OF SATHISHA, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, (RESIDENT OF JAKKANAHALLI) AT PRESENT RESIDING AT SRIKANTANAGARA, SRAVANABELAGOLA TOWN AND HOBLI, CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT-573 201. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.R. JAIPRAKASH, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI.ADINATHA NARDE, ADVOCATE FOR R2; SRI.N. NARAYAN MURTHY, ADVOCATE FOR R3) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:5.10.2010 PASSED IN MVC NO.55/2008 ON THE FILE OF PRESIDING OFFICER, FAST TRACK COURT, CHANNARAYAPATNA, AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF RS.38,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL DEPOSIT.
IN M.F.A. NO.2213 OF 2011:
BETWEEN:
SRI.J.NAGARAJ, SON OF CHIKKAMUNIYAPPA, AGED 45 YEARS, THIMMARAYASWAMY NILAYA, HOUSE NO.104, BOMMENAHALLI VILLAGE, VEERGONAGAR POST, BIDRAHALLI HOBLI, BANGALORE EAST TALUK, BANGALORE-560 049. ... APPELLANT (BY SRI.B. SHARATH KUMAR, ADVOCATE) AND 1. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., BANGALORE, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, SRI.HARI COMPLEX, HARSHA MAHAL ROAD, HASSAN-573 201.
2. S.P. KIRAN KUMAR, SON OF K.V. PARAMESHA, MAJOR IN AGE, RAVIDHARSHANA NILAYA, KAISHA SARDAR, TUMKUR-572 101.
3. SRI.J.L. KUMAR, SON OF LAKKAIAH, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, RESIDING AT SRAVANABELAGOLA TOWN, SRIKANTANAGAR, SRAVANABELAGOLA HOBLI, CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT-573 201. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.E.I. SANMATHI, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI.ADINATHA NARADE, ADVOCATE FOR R2; SRI.NARAYANA MURTHY, ADVOCATE FOR R3) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE COMMON JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:5.10.2010 PASSED IN MVC NO.54/2008 ON THE FILE OF PRESIDING OFFICER, FAST TRACK COURT, CHANNARAYAPATNA, AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF RS.20,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL DEPOSIT.
THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-
J U D G M E N T These two appeals by the owner of the offending vehicle lay a challenge to the judgment and award dated 05.10.2010 made by MACT, Channarayapatna, allowing the Claim Petitions in M.V.C.No.54/2008 and M.V.C.No.55/2008 whereby, a compensation of Rs.20,000/- in the former and of Rs.38,000/- in the latter with interest at the rate of 6 % per annum, have been awarded. The challenge is on the ground of that no liability could have been laid on the appellant and when the respondent-Insurer was liable.
2. In a vehicular accident involving the rash and negligent driving of Tata Qualis bearing Registration No.KA-06-C- 1225, the Claimants got injured and that their Claim Petitions came to be allowed by the MACT vide impugned judgment and awards fastening the liability only on the appellant-owner of the offending vehicle, leaving the Insurer to go free.
3. The MACT after looking to the pleadings of the parties and deposition of four persons namely the two Claimants and two different doctors coupled with as many as 40 documents together in both the cases, has recorded a finding as to the happening of the accident because of rash and negligent driving and has awarded the compensation which are allegedly in lesser sums. No fault can be found in regard to these findings.
4. However, the MACT is not justified in leaving the Insurer of the offending vehicle go free merely because the driving licence of the offending driver lacked the endorsement vide decision of the Apex Court in the case of Mukund Dewangan Vs. Oriental Insurance Company Limited, AIR 2017 SC 3668; the MACT ought to have fastened the liability on the respondent- Insurer.
In the above circumstances, these appeals succeed in part; the impugned judgment and awards are modified, fastening the liability on the respondent-Insurer namely New India Assurance Company Limited, which shall make good the award liability within six weeks.
No costs.
cbc SD/- JUDGE