Claimant appealed dismissal of his motor accident compensation claim, alleging a motorcycle hit him on 28.03.2013. The High Court found a five-day delay in lodging the complaint and inconsistencies in the MLC report and witness evidence, held the Tribunal's finding that negligence was not proved was just and proper, and dismissed the appeal at admission stage.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
NC: 2024:KHC:10418 MFA No. 2540 of 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.2540 OF 2015(MV-I)
BETWEEN:
APPAIAH S/O GOVINDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/O HAGARE VILLAGE, MADIHALLI HOBLI, BELUR TALUK.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. JAGADEESH.H.T., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by THEJASKUMAR N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
…RESPONDENTS
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:16.01.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.1770/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MACT, BELUR.
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Sri.Jagadeesh.H.T., learned counsel for the appellant and Sri.H.S.Lingaraj., learned counsel for respondent No.2 have appeared in person.
Notice to respondents was ordered on 01.07.2015. A perusal of the office note depicts that respondent No.1 is served and unrepresented. He has neither engaged the services of an advocate nor conducted the case as party in person.
Though the appeal is listed today for admission, it is heard finally.
rider of Hero Honda motorcycle bearing RC KA-13-R-4593 came from the side of Hassan in a rash and negligent manner and hit the claimant. Due to impact of the accident, he has sustained injuries. Immediately, after accident he was sifted to Hassan Government Hospital, where he was treated as an in-patient for a period of one month. Contending that he is entitled for compensation, the claimant filed claim petition.
After the issuance of the notice, the first respondent did not appear and he placed ex-parte. The second respondent has appeared through its counsel and filed its written statement and denied the averments made in the claim petition and specifically denied the occurrence of the accident. Among other grounds it prayed for the dismissal of the claim petition.
Based on the above pleadings, the Tribunal framed the issues and parties led evidence and marked the documents. The Tribunal vide Judgment dated:16.01.2015 dismissed the claim petition. It is this Judgment that is called into question in this Appeal on several grounds as set-out in the Memorandum of Appeal.
NC: 2024:KHC:10418 MFA No. 2540 of 2015
The complaint is given by the son of the injured/ claimant namely Lokesh. He states that he was walking along with his father Appaiah to meet Ramesh who was working in a Petrol bunk. At that time, the accident occurred and they took the claimant to the hospital. However, the MLC report is silent about the presence of Lokesh and Ramesh. The claimant was examined as PW1. He also deposes that he has not given particulars of the Road Traffic Accident before the doctor. Furthermore, the alleged accident occurred on 28.03.2013.
However, the complaint was given on 02.04.2013 and the vehicle was seized on the very same day. Hence, it is hard to believe that the accident occurred on the 28th day of March 2013. The Tribunal extenso referred to the material on record and concluded that the Claimant has failed to prove that the alleged accident occurred on account of the rash and negligent riding of the motorcycle. In my view, the conclusion so arrived at by the Tribunal is just and proper. I find no reason to interfere with the judgment of the Tribunal.
For the reasons stated above, the appeal is devoid of merits and it is liable to be dismissed.
dismissed at the stage of admission itself.
Sd/JUDGE
MRP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Tribunal was justified in rejecting the claim petition for compensation for injuries allegedly caused by the motorcycle accident of 28.03.2013?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Appaiah S/o Govindaiah
Swami Jogi S/o Yallappa Jogi
The Manager, The Oriental Insurance Company Limited
Jyoti Mulimani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
