Karnataka High Court
The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd vs Sri. Nagesh on 8 December, 2023
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:44825
MFA No. 3958 of 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T.G. SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA
MFA NO. 3958 OF 2014 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
DO-12, NO.1/58, JAYALAKSHMI MANSION
2ND FLOOR, RAJKUMAR ROAD, 4TH STAGE
RAJAJINAGAR, BANGALORE-560 010
REP. BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER
THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD.
REGIONAL OFFICE, NO.44/45
LEO SHOPPING COMPLEX
RESIDENCY ROAD CROSS
BANGALORE-560 025 ...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SHANKARA REDDY C., ADV.)
AND:
1. SRI. NAGESH
S/O LATE CHIKKA KARIYAPPA
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
R/AT K. SHETTAHALLI VILLAGE
SRIRANGAPATNA TALUK
Digitally signed by
MANDYA DISTRICT-571 438
MALA K N
Location: HIGH COURT 2. THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER
OF KARNATAKA KSRTC, K.H.DOUBLE ROAD
SARIGE BHAVANA, SHANTHINAGAR
BANGALORE-560 027 ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. RAGHU R., ADV. FOR R1;
SRI.B.PHALAKSHAIAH, ADV. FOR R2)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 19.3.2014
PASSED IN MVC NO.475/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE
ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MACT, SRIRANGAPATNA,
AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF RS.1,66,000/- WITH
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:44825
MFA No. 3958 of 2014
INTEREST @ 6% P.A FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL
DEPOSIT.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
In this appeal, the Insurance Company has
challenged the judgment and award dated 19.03.2014
passed in M.V.C.No.475/2010 by the court of
Additional Senior Civil Judge, M.A.C.T., Srirangapatna
('the Tribunal' in short).
2. For the sake of convenience, the rank of the
parties shall be referred to as per their status before
the Tribunal.
3. Brief facts of the case are, on 23.03.2010 at
11.40 a.m., the petitioner while riding the motor cycle
bearing No.KA-11/Q-9206 on Bangalore-Mysore main
road near Paschima Vahini at Srirangapatna hit by a
KSRTC bus bearing No.KA-09/F-4422 injuring him.
After taking treatment at Government Hospital,
Srirangapatna, J.S.S.Hospital, Mysore, he has
approached the Tribunal for grant of compensation of
NC: 2023:KHC:44825
Rs.8,50,000/- with interest @ 18% per annum. Claim
was opposed by the respondents. After taking the
evidence, the Tribunal awarded compensation of
Rs.1,66,000/- with interest @ 6% per annum.
Aggrieved by the same, the Insurance Company has
filed this appeal on various grounds.
4. Heard the arguments of Sri.C.Shankara
Reddy, learned counsel for the Insurance Company,
Sri.R.Raghu, learned counsel for petitioner and
Sri.B.Phalakshaiah, learned counsel for KSRTC.
5. It is the contention of learned counsel for the
Insurance Company that though FIR was registered,
after thorough investigation 'B' report came to be filed.
Before the Tribunal, driver of the KSRTC bus was also
examined but the Tribunal ignored all these aspects,
accepted the accident and assessed the compensation
which is erroneous and sought for interference.
6. Per contra, learned counsel for the petitioner
has contended that, for the 'B' report filed against the
NC: 2023:KHC:44825
driver of the KSRTC bus, the petitioner is not a party
and the petitioner is not prosecuted for his negligence.
Before the Tribunal, when the driver of the bus was
examined, he has made an admission that he has
caused the accident. The Tribunal has considered the
said aspect, accepted the accident, assessed the
compensation and he supported the impugned
judgment.
7. I have given my anxious consideration to the
arguments addressed on both sides and also perused
the materials on record.
8. The material on record did point out that the
driver of the KSRTC bus was prosecuted in Crime
No.151/2010 of Srirangapatna Police as evidenced by
Exs.P1 and P2. Exs.P3 and P4, the crime detail form
and spot mahazar did point out the place of accident
i.e., Mysore-Bangalore road and the accident took
place on the complete left side of the road. IMV report
at Ex.P5 points out damages to the motor cycle as well
as KSRTC bus. The injury certificate at Ex.P6 points
NC: 2023:KHC:44825
out that there is a clear reference as to involvement of
Government bus and the motor cycle in the accident.
9. PW-3/Anasooya is an eyewitness to the
accident. She has given evidence in support of the
petitioner. The cross-examination on behalf of the
Insurance Company has brought nothing in support of
the defence.
10. RW-1/S.Jayadevappa is the driver of the
KSRTC bus. His evidence points out that at the place
of accident, he stopped the bus, motor cycle itself
came and hit on the hind portion of the bus.
Ex.P12/outpatient record of JSS Hospital, Mysore
shows the history of fall from bike after hitting the bus.
This explains the involvement of the bus in the
accident. Hence, the Tribunal is right in accepting the
accident.
11. On perusal of the material on record, the
petitioner is said to have sustained left upper incisor
middle broken, fracture to both nasal bones, nasal
NC: 2023:KHC:44825
septum, maxillary sinuses, pterygoid bones, right
zygomatic arch, medial walls of both orbit and frontal
sinuses with adjacent soft fissure swelling and
haemosinuses. He was under hospitalization between
23.03.2010 to 31.03.2010. The medical bills itself
constitute Rs.60,000/-. Having regard to the
hospitalization, nature of injuries, the medical
expenses, a sum of Rs.1,66,000/- awarded by the
Tribunal is just compensation in the facts and
circumstances of the case and does not call for any
interference. The appeal is devoid of merits. In the
result, the following;
ORDER
(1) The appeal is dismissed.
(2) The impugned judgment and award is
confirmed.
(3) The amount in deposit shall be transmitted
to the Tribunal.
Sd/-
JUDGE
KNM
CT:HS
