Sri.Pradeep K.N vs Sri.H.K.Vijayakumar
2022 Latest Caselaw 1079 Kant

                             1




 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2022

                         PRESENT


       THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR

                           AND

     THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA BADAMIKAR

              MFA No.1812/2015 (MV/I)

BETWEEN:

SRI. PRADEEP K.N.
S/O NAGARAJEGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 24 YFEARS,
RESIDING AT KANCHINAKERE-VILLAGE,
K.R. NAGARA TALUK,
MYSORE DIST - 570 001.

                                         ...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. H.V. BHANU PRAKASH, ADVOCATE)


AND:

1.     SRI. H.K.VIJAYAKUMAR
       S/O KUMAR GOWDA,
       AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
       RESIDING AT HOUSE-NO. 3829,
       17TH CROSS, THILAK NAGARA,
       MYSORE - 570 001.

       (DRIVER OF SWARAJ MAZDA VEHICLE
       BEARING REG.NO.KA-04-C-9300)

2.     SRI B. NARAYAN
       S/O BAILAPPA,
       AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
       RESIDING AT D-NO.95,
       GEDDALAHALLI, RMV II STAGE,
       SANJAYANAGARA,
       BANGALORE - 55
                                  2




        (OWNER OF SWARAJ MAZDA VEHICLE
        BEARING REG.NO.KA-04-C-9300)


3.      THE DIVISIONAL MANGER
        FUTURE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD,
        18/1, # 125/A.P, 3RD FLOOR,
        ASHOK PILLAR ROAD,
        JAYANAGARA, 1ST BLOCK,
        BANGALORE - 560 041.
        (INSURER OF SWARAJ MAZDA VEHICLE
        BEARING REG.NO.KA-04-C-9300)

                                           ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. B. PRADEEP, ADVOCATE FOR R3
    NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH V/O DTD 15.04.2015
    NOTICE TO R2 IS HELD SUFFICIENT V/O DTD 07.09.2021)

        THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:25.11.2014 PASSED IN MVC
NO.1123/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE, COURT OF
SMALL     CAUSES,    MYSURU,    IN    CONCURRENT      CHARGE        OF
ADDITIONAL    COURT    OF   SMALL      CAUSES,     MYSURU,     AS    A
PRESIDING OFFICER, MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL,
MYSURU,     PARTLY    ALLOWING       THE   CLAIM    PETITION    FOR
COMPENSATION         AND       SEEKING      ENHANCEMENT             OF
COMPENSATION.


        THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, P.S.
DINESH KUMAR J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-


                           JUDGMENT

This appeal by the claimant seeking enhancement

of compensation is filed challenging the judgment and

award dated November 25, 2014 in MVC.No.1123/2012

passed by the Principal Judge, Small Causes Court,

Mysuru.

2. For the sake of convenience, parties shall be

referred as per their status before the Tribunal.

3. Heard Shri H.V.Bhanu Prakash learned advocate

for claimants-appellants and Shri B.Pradeep learned

advocate for respondent-insurer.

4. Claimant-Shri. Pradeep, sustained grievous injuries in

a road traffic accident on 13.04.2011, when a Swaraj

Mazda bearing Registration No.KA-04-C-9300 coming

from opposite side dashed against the Motorcycle

bearing Reg.No.KA-09-EH-6305, which he was riding.

Shri Pradeep, sustained grievous injuries. On

adjudication of the claim petition, Tribunal has awarded

Rs.2,70,880/-.

5. Shri. Banuprakash, learned advocate for the

appellant urged following contentions:

• firstly, the Tribunal has erred in exonerating the

insurer from indemnifying the owner of the

offending vehicle; and

• secondly, the quantum of compensation is not

adequate.

6. So far as the first contention is concerned

Shri. Banuprakash, further submitted that the Tribunal

has exonerated the insurer on the ground that as on the

date of the accident, there was no permit for the

offending vehicle namely Swaraj Mazda to ply on

Mysore-Nanjangudu road. He submitted that in such

circumstances, the insurer is liable to pay the amount

with liberty to recover as held in Amrit Paul Singh &

Another Vs. TATA AIG General Insurance1.

7. This position of law is not disputed by Shri.

Pradeep.

8. We have carefully considered the submissions of

learned advocates on both sides & perused the records.

9. The offending vehicle is a Swaraj Mazda goods

lorry and it has dashed against the motor cycle, which

the claimant was riding. Tribunal has recorded in para

24 of the judgment that as on the date of the accident,

2018 (7) SCC 558 Para 23 & 24.

the offending vehicle did not had a valid permit.

Admittedly, the insurer has insured the vehicle. The

only question is whether there was any violation of

policy condition. In view of the decision in Amrit paul

Singh though the offending vehicle did not have permit,

the insurer is liable to satisfy the award with liberty to

recover the same from the owner.

10. So far as second contention with regard to

enhancement is concerned, after arguing the matter for

some time, learned advocates on both sides agreed that

keeping in view the injuries suffered by the claimant, a

sum of Rs.80,000/- be enhanced. Their submission is

placed on record.

11. In the circumstance, a sum of Rs.80,000/- is

awarded in addition to the compensation awarded by

the Tribunal.

12. Hence the following;

ORDER

(i) Appeal is allowed in part by holding

that claimant is entitled for an additional

compensation of Rs.80,000/- payable with

interest at 6% p.a., from the date of filing

claim petition till the date of deposit; and

(ii) Insurer shall pay the entire

compensation amount of Rs.3,50,880/-

(Rs.2,70,880+80,000) with interest at 6%

p.a., excluding the amount paid,

if any, within eight weeks from the date of

receipt of a copy of this order. Disbursement

shall be made as directed by the Tribunal.

No costs.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

DS