Vasudev S/O. Ramchandrappa ... vs Jeelani W/O. Md. Farukh ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 6029 Kant

                                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
                                                  DHARWAD BENCH
                                    DATED THIS THE 04TH DAY OF APRIL, 2022
                                                       BEFORE
                                THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA
                                         M.F.A.No.101618 OF 2015 (MV-I)
                             BETWEEN:

                             VASUDEV S/O. RAMCHANDRAPPA BELAVIGI
                             AGE: 52 YEARS,
                             OCC: BUSINESS
                             R/O. VAGISH NAGAR, 5TH CROSS
                             RANEBENNUR
                             DIST: HAVERI
                                                                               ...PETITIONER
                             (BY SRI. B V SOMAPUR, ADVOCATE)

                             AND:

                             JEELANI W/O. MD. FARUKH PENSIONDAR @ KUMBAR
                             AGE: 25 YEARS,
                             OCC: STEEL FURNITURE WORKS
                             R/O. ESHWAR NAGAR,
                             3RD CROSS, RANEBENNUR
                             DIST: HAVERI
                                                                              ...RESPONDENT
          Digitally signed

J
          by J MAMATHA
          Location:
                             (BY SRI.G.N.NARASAMMANAVAR, ADVOCATE)
          Dharwad
MAMATHA   Date:
          2022.04.07
          16:58:12 +0530
                                    THIS MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, 1988, AGAINST THE

                             JUDGMENT    AND   AWARD   DATED:09.03.2015    PASSED    IN   MVC

                             NO.447/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND

                             MEMBER,    ADDITIONAL   MOTOR    ACCIDENT    CLAIMS    TRIBUNAL,

                             RANEBENNUR, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF Rs.1,08,620/- ALONG

                             WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF THE

                             PETITION TILL ITS REALIZATION.
                                    -2-




                                           MFA No. 101618 of 2015


     THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE

COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:


                         JUDGMENT

This appeal is by the owner of the vehicle who has been

saddled with the liability of paying compensation of

Rs.1,08,620/-.

2. It was contended by the claimant that while he was

travelling on a motorbike bearing registration No.KA-28/J-3375

on 27.01.2013 at about 8.30 p.m., there was a collision

between the bike in which he was riding and the bike owned by

the appellant bearing registration No.KA-27/X-1554 which

resulted in grievous injuries to the claimant for which he was

entitled to compensation.

3. The Tribunal on assessment of the evidence and

taking note of the fact that the charge-sheet had been led

against the rider of the appellant's motorcycle, proceeded to

hold that the negligence was attributable only to the rider of

the appellant's motorcycle and it therefore assessed the

evidence and awarded a sum of Rs.1,08,620/-.

MFA No. 101618 of 2015

4. The award of compensation has been accepted by

the claimant. It is the case of the appellant/owner of the

offending vehicle that the accident occurred only due to the

negligence of the motorcycle being ridden by the

respondent/claimant and therefore, the entire liability could not

be fastened on the appellant. The Tribunal on taking into

consideration the fact that the police had laid a charge-sheet

against the rider of the appellant's motorcycle has come to the

conclusion that the negligence was attributable only to the rider

of the appellant's motorcycle.

5. The case of the appellant/owner that the motorcycle

in which the claimant was travelling was being driven in a

zigzag manner and hit the appellant's vehicle has not been

established. Having regard to the totality of the circumstances,

the Tribunal was justified in coming to the conclusion that the

negligence was attributable only to the rider of the appellant's

motorcycle and consequently, the appellant would be liable to

pay the compensation.

6. I see no reason to entertain this appeal and the

same is accordingly dismissed.

MFA No. 101618 of 2015

7. The amount in deposit shall be paid to the

respondent/claimant.

(Sd/-) JUDGE J m /-