Karnataka High Court
Sri Praveena vs Venkatesh on 1 February, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:4689
MFA No. 471/2019
C/W MFA No. 477/2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 1 ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T.G. SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA
MFA NO. 471 OF 2019 C/W
MFA NO. 477 OF 2019 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
SRI ASHOKA
S/O RANGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS
WORKING AS A COOLIE, R/AT 6TH CROSS
VIDYANAGARA, SHIMOGA TALUK & DIST.-577201
...APPELLANT
[IN MFA NO. 471 OF 2019]
SRI. PRAVEENA
S/O CHANDRAPPA
AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS
WORKING AS COOLIE
R/AT HOLEHONUR ROAD
GURUPURA, SHIMOGA TALUK
& DIST. - 577 201 ... APPELLANT
[IN MFA NO. 477 OF 2019]
(BY SRI. M V MAHESWARAPPA, ADV. FOR
APPELLANT IN BOTH APPEALS)
AND:
Digitally signed by MALA K
N
Location: HIGH COURT OF 1. VENKATESH
KARNATAKA S/O LAKSHMAN, AGE 29 YEARS
VALMIKI BHOVI COMMUNITY
DRIVER OF TARAS LORRY
AP-24-TB-7630, R/AT KOCHACHERAU
VILLAGE, DONA TALUK, KARUNUL DIST.
ANDHRAPRADESH-500 007
2. ARUNACHALA LOGISTIC PVT LTD.,
RAMMAPURAM X ROAD, NALLABANDA
GUDEM, KOBAB NALGONDA, KOBAB
KARNUL DIST. ANDHRA PRADESH - 500 067
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:4689
MFA No. 471/2019
C/W MFA No. 477/2019
3. THE BRANCH MANAGER
M/S NATIONAL INS. COMPANY LTD.
BRANCH OFFICE, AT HARSHA COMPLEX
SHIVAMOGGA CITY -577 201
...RESPONDENTS
[COMMON IN BOTH APPEALS]
(BY SRI.B.PRADEEP, ADV. FOR
SRI.H.C.LINGARAJU, ADV. FOR R3;
R1 & R2 SERVED)
THESE APPEALS ARE FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF
MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED.
16.10.2018 PASSED IN MVC NOS.803/2016 AND 804/2016
ON THE FILE OF THE 3RD ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE AND
ADDITIONAL MACT-3, SHIVAMOGGA, DISMISSING THE CLAIM
PETITION FOR COMPENSATION.
THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
In these appeals, the petitioners have challenged
the common judgment and award dated 16.10.2018 in
M.V.C.No.803/2016 and M.V.C.No.804/2016 passed by
the III Additional District Judge and Addl.M.A.C.T.-III,
Shivamogga ('the Tribunal' for 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 25.01.2015 at
1.00 p.m., both the petitioners were riding the motor
NC: 2024:KHC:4689
cycle bearing No.KA-14/X-0724 from Channagiri
towards Kaimara, met with an accident near Ashoka
Nagara village hit by lorry bearing No.AP-24/TB-7630
injuring them. After taking treatment at Mc.Gann
Hospital, Shivamogga, Father Muller Hospital,
Mangalore, both have approached the Tribunal for
grant of compensation. Claim was opposed by the
Insurance Company. The Tribunal after holding
enquiry by taking the evidence by the impugned
judgment summarily dismissed the claim petitions.
Aggrieved by the same, both the petitioners have filed
these appeals on various grounds.
4. Heard the arguments of
Sri.M.V.Maheshwarappa, learned Counsel for the
petitioners and Sri.B.Pradeep, learned counsel on
behalf of Sri.H.S.Lingaraju, learned counsel for the
Insurance Company.
5. It is the contention of the learned counsel for
the petitioners that soon after the accident, petitioners
NC: 2024:KHC:4689
were brought to Mc.Gann Hospital, Shivamogga in 108
Ambulance, they were admitted to the hospital at 2.45
p.m. wherein the history of the accident is correctly
mentioned including time of accident. However, while
filing the complaint, there is a mistake in mentioning
the time of accident, instead of 1.00 p.m., it is
mentioned as 3.30 p.m., and the Tribunal doubted the
very accident and dismissed the claim petition, which
is contrary to the material on record and he seeks
remand of both matters.
6. Per contra, learned counsel for the Insurance
Company has contended that, in the Police complaint,
the time of accident is specifically mentioned as 3.30
p.m., whereas, in the hospital records, it is mentioned
that at 2.45 p.m., both the petitioners were
hospitalized. If they were hospitalized at 2.45 p.m.,
there is no question of occurrence of accident at 3.30
p.m. The Tribunal has rightly doubted the veracity of
the accident as well as the evidence of the petitioners
and he supported the impugned judgment. He further
NC: 2024:KHC:4689
submits that for the fault of the petitioners, the claim
petitions were dismissed, hence, in the event of any
remand, the Insurance Company is not liable to pay
interest on the award amount.
7. I have given my anxious consideration to the
arguments addressed on behalf of both parties and
perused the records.
8. The material on record did point out that on
25.01.2015 at 1.00 p.m., there was an accident
involving motor cycle and the lorry in question injuring
both the petitioners, they were brought to Mc.Gann
Hospital in 108 Ambulance. History furnished therein
as they sustained injuries in the said accident at 1.00
p.m. The Police complaint was filed on the next day
mentioning that the time of accident was 3.30 p.m.
Unfortunately, ignoring this aspect before the Tribunal,
the petitioners have pleaded the time of accident as
3.30 p.m. and accordingly, adduced the evidence,
NC: 2024:KHC:4689
which led the Tribunal to doubt the veracity of the
accident and dismissed the claim petitions.
9. On perusal of the impugned judgment, it is
pertinent to note that the Tribunal did not assess any
compensation and lost sight of entries made in the
medical records. The Tribunal has placed reliance on
the Police papers rather than the information furnished
to the hospital at the time of admission, which is more
relevant. The Tribunal has to consider the claim of the
petitioners with reference to the first information
furnished to the hospital as to the time of accident and
then to determine the compensation. The submission
made on behalf of the petitioners merits consideration.
Hence, it is a fit case for remand, in the result, the
following;
ORDER
i) Both the appeals are allowed.
ii) The common impugned judgment and
award is set aside.
NC: 2024:KHC:4689
iii) The matter is remitted back to the Tribunal.
The claim petitions are restored to the
stage of further evidence of the petitioners.
After affording opportunity to both parties,
the Tribunal shall consider the claim
petitions afresh in accordance with law
without being influenced by any
observations made above.
iv) All the contentions raised by the Insurance
Company are kept open.
v) Without further notice, the parties shall
appear before the Tribunal on 4th March
2024.
vi) The amount in deposit, if any, shall be
transmitted to the Tribunal.
SD/-
JUDGE
KNM
CT:HS
