Allowed

Murthy @ M S Murthy v. Avinash H a

Karnataka HC13 Jun 2022MFA/3182/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the appeal under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act against an award of compensation. The matter was remanded to the Tribunal for fresh consideration, granting liberty to parties to adduce additional evidence and documents to establish their case.

What did the court decide?

The judgment and award of the Tribunal are set aside. The matter is remanded to the Tribunal for fresh consideration within three months. Liberty to parties to adduce additional evidence and produce d

Murthy @ M S Murthy Vs Avinash H a — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF JUNE 2022

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H. T. NARENDRA PRASAD

¶6

MFA No.3182 OF 2020(MV)

¶7

BETWEEN

¶8

MURTHY @ M S MURTHY S/O SIDDAIAH AGED 45 YEARS R/AT NO.109/37 I MAIN, 3RD CROSS SHIVU LAYOUT MARIYAPPANAPALYA BENGALURU-560056.

¶9

...APPELLANT

¶10

(BY SRI. D.NAGARAJA REDDY, ADV.)

¶11

AND

¶12

1 . AVINASH H A

¶13

S/O SRI APPAJI S MAJOR R/AT NO.22, 5^TH CROSS MUDDAMMA GARDEN BENSON TOWN BEGNALURU-560046.

¶14

2 . M/S UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD R/BY ITS MANAGER REGIONAL OFFICE, T.P.JUB

¶15

¶16

5^TH AND 6^TH FLOORS KRISHI BUILDING HUDSON CIRCLE OPP TO BBMP HEAD OFFICE NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BEGNALURU-560001.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI.H.C. VRUSHABHENDRAIAH, ADV. FOR R2: NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH)

¶19

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 02.12.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO. 1771/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE IX ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND ACMM, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MEMBER, MACT-7, BENGALURU (SCCH-7), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶20

THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

This appeal under Section 173(1) of Motor

¶23

Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) has been filed by the claimant being aggrieved

¶24

¶25

by the judgment and decree dated 2.12.2019 passed by MACT, Bangalore in MVC 1771/2019.

¶26

Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal briefly stated are that on 10.3.2019 the claimant was proceeding on his motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-01-EB-6225 from Ullal towards Kengeri, near Indian Oil Petrol Bunk, at that time, car bearing registration No.KA-50-9481 being driven by its driver at a high speed and in a rash and negligent manner, dashed to the vehicle of the claimant. As a result of the aforesaid accident, the claimant sustained grievous injuries and was hospitalized.

¶27

The claimant filed a petition under Section 166 of the Act seeking compensation. It was pleaded that he spent huge amount towards medical expenses, conveyance, etc. It was further pleaded that the accident occurred purely on account of the

¶28

¶29

rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver.

¶30

On service of notice, the respondent No.2 appeared through counsel and filed written statement in which the averments made in the petition were denied.

¶31

The respondent No.1 did not appear before the Tribunal inspite of service of notice and was placed ex-parte.

¶32

On the basis of the pleadings of the parties,

¶33

the Claims Tribunal framed the issues and thereafter recorded the evidence. The claimant himself was examined as PW-1 and Dr.Nagaraj.B.N. was examined as PW-2 and got exhibited documents namely Ex.P1 to Ex.P25. On behalf of the respondents, one witness

¶34

was examined as RW-1 and got exhibited documents namely Ex.R1 to Ex.R3. The Claims Tribunal, by the

¶35

¶36

impugned judgment, inter alia, held that the accident took place on account of rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver, as a result of which, the claimant sustained injuries. The Tribunal further held that the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs.598,159/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. and directed the owner of the offending vehicle to deposit the compensation amount along with interest. Being aggrieved, this appeal has been filed.

¶37

The learned counsel for the claimant has

¶38

contended that the claimant has sustained grievous injuries in the accident and he has examined Dr.Nagaraj B.N. as PW-2. PW-2, the doctor has stated in his evidence that the claimant has suffered disability of 86% to lower limb and disability of 28% to whole body. Considering the nature of injuries, the overall compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on

¶39

¶40

the lower side. Even after disposal of the claim petition, the claimant was admitted to the hospital and has incurred an amount of Rs.80,000/- towards 'medical expenses'. To that effect, he has filed I.A.1/2022 under Order 41 Rule 27 of CPC for production of additional documents.

¶41

He further contended that even though the insured has violated the policy conditions, in respect of risk of third party is concerned, the Insurance Company is liable to pay compensation at first instance with liberty to recover the same from the owner of the offending vehicle. Hence, he prays for allowing the appeal.

¶42

On the other hand, the learned counsel for Insurance Company contended that the injuries sustained by the claimant are minor in nature. He contended that the application for additional documents has been produced before this Court and

¶43

¶44

there is no opportunity for the respondent-Insurance Company to contest the case. Hence, he requests for remanding the matter to the Tribunal with opportunity to the Insurance Company to contest the case.

¶45

Heard the learned counsel for the parties

¶46

and perused the judgment of the Tribunal.

¶47

In view of the submissions made by the

¶48

learned counsel for the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to remand the matter to the Tribunal for fresh consideration with liberty to the parties to adduce additional evidence and produce additional documents to establish their case.

¶49

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. The judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is setaside.

¶50

¶51

The matter is remanded to the Tribunal for fresh consideration. The parties are at liberty to adduce additional evidence and produce additional documents to establish their case.

¶52

The Tribunal after giving opportunities to the parties shall decide the matter in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment .

¶53

It is made clear that no opinion is expressed on the merits of the case.

¶54

All the contentions of the parties are kept open. Registry is directed to return the application i.e.,

¶55

I.A.1/2022 along with documents to the appellant

¶56

after retaining the Xerox copy of the same.

¶57

Sd/JUDGE

¶58

Murthy @ M S Murthy v. Avinash H a

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Murthy @ M S Murthy v. Avinash H a

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Hanumanthanaika Vs Sri Shankara

Deepa Vs Bharamappa

Subramanya. T Vs R. Dhananjaya

Smt Nagarathna H Vs Sri Prakash a S

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Mahabala Poojary

Smt Shaha Taj Vs Sri Mahadeva