Karnataka High Court
Hanumantappa S/O Basavanneppa ... vs Mahalingappa Kalaveerappa ... on 1 June, 2022
Bench: P.Krishna Bhat
-1-
MFA No. 24188 of 2010
C/W MFA No. 24187 of 2010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 01ST DAY OF JUNE, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.KRISHNA BHAT
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 24188 OF 2010 (MV-I)
C/W
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 24187 OF 2010
IN MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 24188 OF 2010
BETWEEN:
1. HANUMANTAPPA
S/O BASAVANNEPPA GANJIGATTI
AGE: MAJOR,
OCC: DRIVER OF TRACTORBEARING NO.
CTD-8209/3210 HMT.COM.,
GETTER-CUM-AGRICULTUERIST,
R/O MARANBID, TQ: HANGAL,
DIST: HAVERI.
2. SHIVAPPA S/O KOTRAPPA HOSAMANI
AGE: MAJOR,
OCC: OWNER OF TRACTOR NO.
CTD-8209/8210 (HMT. COM.ZETTER TRACTOR)
R/O NEERALAGI, TQ: HANGAL, DIST: HAVERI.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. RAJENDRA R. PATIL, ADV., FOR
Digitally signed
by JAGADISH T
SRI. F V PATIL, ADVOCATE)
R
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD
AND:
Date: 2022.06.02
10:26:48 +0530
1. MAHALINGAPPA KALAVEERAPPA BADIGER
AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: CARPENTER
-2-
MFA No. 24188 of 2010
C/W MFA No. 24187 of 2010
R/O. HATTARGER ONI, HAVERI.
2. KUMAR PRASHANT
S/O. MAHALINGAPPA BADIGER
AGE: 6 YEARS,
REPTED. BY M/G/ HIS FATHER,
MAHALINGAPPA KALAVEERAPPA BADIGER,
R/O. HATTARGER ONI, HAVERI
3. KUMAR PRADEEP
S/O. MAHALINGAPPA BADIGER
AGE: 4 YEARS,
REPTED. BY M/G/ HIS FATHER,
MAHALINGAPPA KALAVEERAPPA BADIGER,
R/O. HATTARGER ONI, HAVERI
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. N P VIVEKMEHTA, ADVOCATE, FOR R1-R3)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/SEC.173(1) OF THE M.V. ACT, 1988,
PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DTD:14-08-
2009 PASSED IN MVC NO.109/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE
DISTRICT JUDGE, AND MEMBER, MACT (FAST TRACK COURT)
HAVERI, AWARDING THE COMPENSATION OF RS.2,00,000/- WITH
INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 6% P.A., FROM THE DATE OF
PETITION TILL REALISATION BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL.
IN MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 24187 OF 2010
BETWEEN:
1. HANUMANTAPPA
S/O BASAVANNEPPA GANJIGATTI
AGE: MAJOR,
OCC: DRIVER OF TRACTORBEARING NO.
-3-
MFA No. 24188 of 2010
C/W MFA No. 24187 of 2010
CTD-8209/3210 HMT.COM.,
GETTER-CUM-AGRICULTUERIST,
R/O MARANBID, TQ: HANGAL,
DIST: HAVERI.
2. SHIVAPPA S/O KOTRAPPA HOSAMANI
AGE: MAJOR,
OCC: OWNER OF TRACTOR NO. CTD-8209/8210
(HMT. COM.ZETTER TRACTOR)
R/O NEERALAGI, TQ: HANGAL, DIST: HAVERI.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. RAJENDRA R. PATIL, ADV., FOR
SRI. F V PATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
MAHALINGAPPA KALAVEERAPPA BADIGER
AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: CARPENTER
R/O. HATTARGER ONI, HAVERI.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. N P VIVEKMEHTA, ADVOCATE, FOR R1-R3)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/SEC.173(1) OF THE M.V. ACT, 1988,
PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DTD:14-08-
2009 PASSED IN MVC NO.94/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE DISTRICT
JUDGE, AND MEMBER, MACT (FAST TRACK COURT) HAVERI,
AWARDING THE COMPENSATION OF RS.50,000/- WITH INTEREST
AT THE RATE OF 6% P.A., FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL
REALISATION BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL.
THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS
DAY, COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-4-
MFA No. 24188 of 2010
C/W MFA No. 24187 of 2010
JUDGMENT
Calling in question the judgment and award dated
14.08.2009 passed by the learned District Judge (Fast
Track) and M.A.C.T., Haveri (for short "the Tribunal) in
MVC Nos.94/2009 and 109/2009 recorded a finding of
composite negligence against the present appellants and
consequent fastening of liability to pay 50% of the
compensation, these appeals are presented by the
aggrieved owner and driver of the tractor and trailer
bearing registration No. CTD No.8209/8210.
2. Brief facts insofar as same are relevant for the
current purposes is that the claimant-Mahalingappa and
his two minor children have come up with two claim
petitions in MVC Nos.94/2009 and 109/2009 before the
learned Tribunal alleging that on 24.02.1996, while said
Mahalingappa was riding his Bajaj M-80 two-wheeler with
his wife-Lalita, daughter-Yashodha with other two children
as pillion riders from Kandur to Haveri, the tractor trailer
MFA No. 24188 of 2010
C/W MFA No. 24187 of 2010
bearing Registration No.CTD-8209/8210 loaded with
sugarcane with its driver driving it in a rash and negligent
manner and took the vehicle abruptly to the right side
dashing the same against the Bajaj M-80 resulting in an
accident which lead to death of the two deceased.
3. Two claim petitions were contested by the
owner of the offending tractor trailer by filing a detailed
statement of objections.
4. During the trial, claimant-Mahalingappa
examined himself as PW1 and Ex.P1 to Ex.P7 were
marked. Both the respondents before the learned Tribunal
examined themselves as RW1 and RW2.
5. Learned Tribunal, after hearing the learned
counsel on both sides and perusing the records, allowed
the claim petitions in part and proceeded to hold that the
present appellants were compositely negligent in causing
the accident and thereafter fastened the liability to pay
50% of the compensation determined with interest
MFA No. 24188 of 2010
C/W MFA No. 24187 of 2010
thereon at 6% per annum from the date of claim petitions
till the date of realization.
6. Learned counsel for the appellants, who are the
owner and driver of the offending tractor and trailer
strenuously contends that the finding of the Tribunal that
there was composite negligence on the part of the
appellants is wholly without evidence and therefore, the
said finding is liable to be set aside and appeal is required
to be allowed.
7. Learned counsel for the claimants-respondents,
per contra, submits that the learned Tribunal, upon
detailed consideration of the materials placed before it,
has come to the conclusion that the appellants are
compositely liable to pay 50% of the compensation and
that being based on evidence is not required to be
interfered with and therefore, the appeals should be
dismissed.
MFA No. 24188 of 2010
C/W MFA No. 24187 of 2010
8. The factum of the occurrence of the motor
vehicle accident on 24.02.1996 on account of collision
between Bajaj M-80, which was being driven by claimant-
Mahalingappa and the tractor-trailer bearing registration
No.CTD-8209/8210 itself is not in question. The point in
question is whether the accident had taken place in the
manner projected by the claimants before the learned
Tribunal?
9. There is also no dispute about the fact that the
police after investigation had filed charge-sheet against
the claimant-Mahalingappa himself, who was riding the
Bajaj M-80 bearing registration No.KA-27/E-7093. Learned
counsel on both sides also do not dispute the position that
in the claim petitions, the claimant-Mahalingappa had
himself averred that at the time of the accident he was
riding Bajaj M-80 with his wife and three minor children on
the pillion. The examination-in-chief filed by way of
affidavit reads as under:
MFA No. 24188 of 2010
C/W MFA No. 24187 of 2010
"2. That, on 24-2-1996 at about 6.00 P.M. Accident
had been taken when, I was traveling by Bajaj M-80
scooter accompanied by the deceased wife from
Kundur to Haveri via Maranabid.
3) While I was driving my scooter which had been
came near between Maranabid-Naregal road, at that
time one Tractor-trailer bearing its reg.No.C.T.D/8209-
8210 was running forward with a great speed rashly
and negligently without observing the traffic rules and
which was loaded with sugarcane abnormally driven by
its driver.
4) The above said driver of the said tractor-trailer
was driving it in the middle of the road in zigzag
motion which where the road was conjusted.
5) While, I was driving my scooter with a minimum
speed by over taking the tractor-trailer in meanwhile,
one bullock-cart had come in opposite direction. In
view of facing of Bullock-cart, I had been trying to
drive my scooter from behind the above said tractor-
trailer which was moving in a zigzag motion negligently
driven by its driver.
6) In view of driving my scooter from behind T.T.
unit, which had been dashed against by the above said
tractor-trailer. Due to impact of the above said
accident, my scooter had been fell-down and my
deceased wife had been thrown out from scooter and
fell down beneath the right back wheel of the trailer of
MFA No. 24188 of 2010
C/W MFA No. 24187 of 2010
a tractor, which was moving and my deceased wife had
sustained fatal injuries."
10. The above affidavit of the claimant-
Mahalingappa shows that, according to him, the driver of
the tractor-trailer was driving the offending vehicle in high
speed and he was proceeding in a zigzag manner and the
claimant himself was riding the two-wheeler with
moderate speed and the road was congested. In spite of
the same, the affidavit filed by way of examination-in-chief
of the claimant reads that he was coming from behind and
there was impact with the tractor-trailer by his own two-
wheeler. The facts stated in the affidavit by way of
examination-in-chief itself shows that the entire accident
had resulted on account of rash and negligent driving of
the Bajaj M-80 by the claimant himself. Further, records
show that Bajaj M-80 was carrying apart from rider-
Mahalingappa, his deceased wife and three minor children.
As already noticed, charge sheet is also filed against him.
Learned Tribunal has not adverted to this aspect of
- 10 -
MFA No. 24188 of 2010
C/W MFA No. 24187 of 2010
evidence emanating from the examination-in-chief of the
claimant himself and thereby has fallen into an error in
recording a finding that there was composite negligence
on the part of the driver of the offending tractor-trailer,
which was hit by the Bajaj M-80 which was coming from
behind. Therefore, the judgment and award of the learned
Tribunal is not sustainable and accordingly it is set aside.
11. In the result, the appeals are entitled to be
allowed and I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
The above appeals are allowed.
The judgment and award dated 14.08.2009
passed by the District Judge (Fast Track) and
M.A.C.T., Haveri in MVC Nos.94/2009 and
109/2009 is hereby set aside and the claim
petitions are dismissed.
The amount, if any, deposited by the
appellants in these cases are directed to be
refunded to them forthwith.
- 11 -
MFA No. 24188 of 2010
C/W MFA No. 24187 of 2010
Return the records to the learned Tribunal
forthwith.
In view of disposal of the appeals, pending
interlocutory applications, if any, do not survive
for consideration and are disposed of
accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE
YAN
