Karnataka High Court
Smt.Savitri vs Shri.Ashok Babu Gudasi on 12 January, 2024
Author: V.Srishananda
Bench: V.Srishananda
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:909
MFA No. 100833 of 2016
C/W MFA No. 101680 of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.100833 OF 2016 (MV-D)
C/W
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.101680 OF 2016
IN M. F. A. NO.100833 OF 2016
BETWEEN:
ASHOK BABU GUDASI,
AGE: 54 YEARS,OCC: NIL,
R/O: KURNI, TQ: HUKKERI,
DIST: BELAGAVI-590 001.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. B.S. KAMATE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD.,
D.O., MARUTI GALLI, BELAGAVI-590 001.
2. SMT. SAVITRI W/O. VITHOBA KHADE,
Digitally signed
by SAMREEN
AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
AYUB
DESHNUR
R/O: KANAGALA, TQ: HUKKERI,
Date:
2024.02.01
NOW AT C/O: D.M. SHIRAGAVI,
14:29:43 +0530
VINAYAK HOUSING COLONY,
SAHU NAGAR, BELAGAVI-590 001.
3. KUM. PRATAMESH S/O. VITHOBA KHADE,
AGE: 15 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
R/O: KANAGALA, TQ: HUKKERI,
NOW AT C/O: D.M. SHIRAGAVI,
VINAYAK HOUSING COLONY,
SAHU NAGAR, BELAGAVI-590 001.
REP. BY M/G MOTHER
RESPONDENT NO.2.
4. KUM. OMKAR S/O. VITHOBA KHADE,
AGE:9 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:909
MFA No. 100833 of 2016
C/W MFA No. 101680 of 2016
R/O: KANAGALA, TQ: HUKKERI,
NOW AT C/O: D.M. SHIRAGAVI,
VINAYAK HOUSING COLONY,
SAHU NAGAR, BELAGAVI-590 001.
REP. BY M/G MOTHER
RESPONDENT NO.2
5. SMT. GOURABAI W/O. ISHWAR KHADE,
AGE: 75 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O: KANAGALA, TQ: HUKKERI,
NOW AT C/O: D.M. SHIRAGAVI,
VINAYAK HOUSING COLONY,
SAHU NAGAR, BELAGAVI-590 001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. GEETHA K.M. @ PAWAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2-R5;
SRI. R.R. MANE, ADVOCATE FOR R1)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST IS FILED UNDER SECTION
173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT &
AWARD DATED:25.11.2015, PASSED IN MVC.NO.1658/2011 ON THE
FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE AND MEMBER
ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL - II, BELAGAVI,
AWARDING THE COMPENSATION OF RS.13,40,542/- WITH INTEREST
AT THE RATE OF 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ITS
REALIZATION.
IN M. F. A. NO.101680 OF 2016
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. SAVITRI W/O. VITHOBA KHADE,
AGE: 41 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE HOLD WORK,
R/O: KANAGALA, TQ: HUKKERI,
NOW AT C/O: D.M. SHIRGAVI,
VINAYAK HOUSING COLONY,
SHAHU NAGAR, BELAGAVI.
2. KUMAR PRATHAMESH S/O. VITHOBA KHADE,
AGE: 14 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
R/O: KANAGALA, TQ: HUKKERI,
DIST. BELAGAVI.
NOW AT C/O: D.M. SHIRGAVI,
VINAYAK HOUSING COLONY,
SAHU NAGAR, BELAGAVI.
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:909
MFA No. 100833 of 2016
C/W MFA No. 101680 of 2016
3. KUMAR OMKAR S/O. VITHOBA KHADE,
AGE: 8 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
R/O: KANAGALA, TQ: HUKKERI,
DIST. BELAGAVI.
A2 AND A3 R/BY MINOR GUARDIAN A1
SMT. SAVITRI W/O. VITHOBA KHADE,
4. SMT. GOURABAI W/O. ISHWAR KHADE,
AGE: 69 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
R/O: KANAGALA, TQ: HUKKERI,
DIST. BELAGAVI.
NOW AT C/O: D.M. SHIRGAVI,
VINAYAK HOUSING COLONY,
SAHU NAGAR, BELAGAVI.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SMT. GEETHA K.M. @ PAWAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SHRI. ASHOK BABU GUDASI,
AGE: 53 YEARS,OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: KURNI, TQ: HUKKERI,
DIST: BELAGAVI.
(OWNER OF THE MOTORCYCLE BEARING
NO.KA-23/Q-2445)
2. THE DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER,
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY
D.O., MARUTI GALLI, BELAGAVI
(INSURER OF THE MOTOR CYCLE BEARING
NO.KA-23/Q-2445
POLICY NO.160502/31/09/02/00019997 VALID FROM
15.02.2010 TO 14.02.2011)
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. B.S. KAMATE, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI. R.R. MANE, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST IS FILED UNDER SECTION
173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT &
AWARD DATED:25.11.2015, PASSED IN MVC.NO.1658/2011 ON THE
FILE OF THE I-ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE AND MEMBER MOTOR
ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL - II, BELAGAVI, PARTLY ALLOWING
THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:909
MFA No. 100833 of 2016
C/W MFA No. 101680 of 2016
THESE MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEALS, COMING ON FOR
FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Heard Sri.B.S.Kamate, learned counsel for the appellant - owner of motorcycle, Smt.Geeta K.M. @ Pawar, learned counsel for the claimants and Sri.R.R.Mane, learned counsel for the Insurance Company.
2. These two appeals arise out of the judgment and award passed in MVC No.1658/2011 on the file of the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Belagavi dated 25.11.2015.
3. The dependants of deceased Vithoba Ishwar Khade filed a claim petition under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act conceding that Vithoba lost his life in a road traffic accident occurred on 25.02.2010 involving motorcycle bearing No.CTD-4385 and another motorcycle bearing No.KA-23/Q-2445.
4. The police after receipt of complaint with regard to the incident, thoroughly investigated the matter and -5- NC: 2024:KHC-D:909 MFA No. 100833 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 101680 of 2016 taking note of the attendant circumstances including spot panchanama and sketch of place of incident, filed charge sheet against riders of both motorcycles. Admittedly, there was no insurance to the motorcycle bearing No.KA-23/Q- 2445.
5. The Tribunal after considering the objection statements filed by the owner and the Insurance Company, raised necessary issues and on consideration of oral and documentary evidence placed on record by the parties, allowed the claim petition in a sum of Rs.26,81,084/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization and attributed 50% contributory negligence on the rider of the motorcycle belonging to first respondent and directed that 50% of the adjudged compensation shall be paid by the owner of the motorcycle who is first respondent in a sum of Rs.13,40,542/-.
6. Being aggrieved by the same, first respondent - owner of the motorcycle bearing No.KA-23/Q-2445 has -6- NC: 2024:KHC-D:909 MFA No. 100833 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 101680 of 2016 preferred MFA No.100833/2016, whereas the claimants have preferred MFA No.101680/2016 seeking enhancement of compensation.
7. Sri.B.S.Kamate, learned counsel appearing for the appellant - owner of motorcycle bearing No.KA-23/Q- 2445 contended that attributing 50% contributory negligence on the rider of motorcycle bearing No.CTD 4385 is on lower side and it is because of the negligent riding of motorcycle by the deceased, the accident has occurred and sought for allowing the appeal by enhancing the contributory negligence on the deceased to the extent of 75%.
8. Per contra, Smt.Geetha K.M., learned counsel appearing for the claimants contended that when charge sheet is filed by the police against both vehicles, attributing 50% negligence on the deceased is just and proper and the quantum of compensation is to be reassessed.
-7-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:909 MFA No. 100833 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 101680 of 2016
9. Sri.R.R.Mane, learned counsel representing the Insurance Company of the motorcycle No.KA-23/Q-2445 contended that the Insurance Company is a formal party and suitable orders be passed as there is no fastening of liability on the Insurance Company.
10. In view of the rival contentions of the parties, this Court perused the material on record meticulously. perused.
11. On such perusal of the material on record, the sketch of the place of accident is produced before the Court and this Court has perused the same.
12. Taking note of the fact that the accident has occurred at 6.30 p.m. and also taking note of the negligence that could be attributable to the riders of both motorcycles, the investigating agency has rightly filed charge sheet against both riders. Charge sheet filed by the police is not challenged either by the appellant in MFA No.100833/2016 or by the dependants of deceased. -8-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:909 MFA No. 100833 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 101680 of 2016
13. Under such circumstances, it should be construed that the police have rightly filed charge sheet against the riders of both the motorcycles. The Tribunal after assessing the material evidence on record, has rightly computed the quantum of compensation in a sum of Rs.26,81,084/- and attributed 50% contributory negligence to the rider of motorcycle who lost his life in the accident.
14. There is no scope for reduction of contributory negligence on the part of the deceased having regard to the fact that charge sheet came to be filed against riders of both motorcycles. Therefore, there is no merit in MFA No.100833/2016.
15. Taking note of relevant aspects of the matter the quantum of compensation assessed by the Tribunal in a sum of R.26,81,084/- is also just and proper and therefore, there is no scope for any enhancement of compensation.
-9-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:909 MFA No. 100833 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 101680 of 2016
16. In view of the foregoing discussion, following order is passed:
ORDER
(i) Both the appeals are dismissed.
(ii) Amount in deposit, if any, is ordered to be transmitted to the concerned Tribunal for disbursement.
(iii) Balance amount, if any, is to be deposited within six weeks from today.
Sd/-
JUDGE SH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 55