IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR MFA NO. 5682 OF 2016 (MV) BETWEEN SRI. RANGANATH NAIK S/O GOVINDA NAIK AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS R/AT NEAR NISARGA SCHOOL 2ND CROSS ROAD SRIGHANDA NAGAR HEGGANAHALLI BANGALORE CITY. ... APPELLANT (BY SRI. C. R. VENKATESH - ADVOCATE) AND SRI. BABULA JAIN S/O LATE. JAWAHARLAL AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS R/AT, NO-4, LAKSHI NIVAS RAJAGOPAL NAGAR MAIN ROAD OPPOSITE POOJA TESTILES BANGALORE-560058. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI. P. MAHADEVA SWAMY - ADVOCATE) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 16.5.2016 PASSED IN MVC NO. 1116/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER, PRINCIPAL MACT, BANGALORE, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.1,70,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 9% P.A. ON RS. 1,60,000/- FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondent.
2. The factual matrix of the appeal is that the respondent herein had filed a claim petition before the Tribunal seeking compensation for the injury caused to him in an accident that occurred on 30.09.2014 at about 4.30 p.m. It is stated that when the respondent was proceeding in his motor cycle bearing No.KA-42-EA- 4448, when he neared Eshwar Idol in Rajagopalnagar main road, all of a sudden a tanker bearing No.KA-42- 576 had come in high speed and in a rash and negligent manner and had dashed against the respondent, as a result of which the respondent aged 63 years fell down and sustained grievous injuries on his left leg and other parts of the body. Hence, he filed a claim petition before the Tribunal seeking compensation.
3. On service of notice, the owner of the offending tanker – the appellant herein appeared before the Tribunal and filed his written statement denying the petition averments. The Tribunal on hearing the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and on appreciating the entire evidence on record, awarded compensation in a sum of Rs.1,70,000/- with interest at 9% per annum on Rs.1,60,000/- from the date of petition till the date of realisation and the appellant herein was directed to pay the compensation within two months. It is this judgment which is under challenge in the present appeal.
4. But however, the parties to this appeal have now filed a ‘Joint memo’ dated 15.02.2019 stating that they have amicably settled the case between themselves and the appellant – owner of the offending vehicle has agreed to pay an amount of Rs.1,65,000/-, out of which Rs.25,000/- is already deposited before this court and the remaining amount of Rs.1,40,000/- has been paid by the appellant by way of a Demand Draft bearing No.002504 dated 16.01.2019. The respondent – claimant has also acknowledged receipt of the same and has agreed to the settlement.
5. Both the parties as well as their counsel have endorsed their signatures to the joint memo. Hence, the joint memo dated 15.02.2019 is taken on record. Consequently, the appeal is disposed of in terms of the joint memo.
6. The Registry is directed to disburse the amount of Rs.25,000/- in deposit before this court, to the respondent – claimant, on proper identification.
There shall be no order as to costs. Office to draw a decree accordingly.
SD/- JUDGE KS