This appeal challenged the Motor Assurance Tribunal's rejection of a compensation claim. The High Court held that since the appellant admitted hitting a cow causing the accident, the claim was rejected rightly, and the appeal was dismissed.
The Miscellaneous First Appeal was rejected.
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:9251 MFA No. 605 of 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 605 OF 2013 (MV)
BETWEEN:
B.A.DINESH S/O B.R.VENKATEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, RESIDENT OF KEMPEGOWDA ROAD, BELUR TALUK-573 115. HASSAN DISTRICT.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SHARATH KUMAR., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. CHETHAN.B., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by THEJASKUMAR N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
S/O B.M.ANNEGOWDA, MAJOR, RESIDENT OF KEMPEGOWDA ROAD, BELUR TALUK-573 115. HASSAN DISTRICT.
…RESPONDENTS
(R1-SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED; SRI. Y.KSHESHAGIRI RAO., ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 16.11.2012
NC: 2024:KHC:9251 MFA No. 605 of 2013
PASSED IN MVC NO.63/2011 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.Sharath Kumar., learned counsel on behalf of Sri.Chethan.B., for the appellant and Sri.Y.K.Sheshagiri Rao., learned counsel for respondent No.2 have appeared in person.
Motorcycle bearing Registration No.KA-46-E-0030 came in a rash and negligent manner and hit their vehicle. Due to the impact, the claimant sustained grievous injuries. Immediately, he was shifted to Belur Government Hospital for first aid treatment. Thereafter, he was shifted to Government Hospital Hassan and Chamarajendra Hospital and took treatment as an in-patient. Contending that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligence riding of the TVS Victor Motorcycle bearing Registration No.KA-46-E-0030, the claimant filed claim petition seeking compensation.
In response to the notice, the respondents appeared through their counsel and filed separate objections. They denied the petition averments and prayed for dismissal of the petition. Among other grounds, they prayed for dismissal of the petition.
Based on the above pleadings, the Tribunal framed Issues. The parties led evidence and marked the documents. The Tribunal vide Judgment and Award dated:16.11.2012 rejected the petition. It is this Judgment that is called into
NC: 2024:KHC:9251 MFA No. 605 of 2013
question in this appeal on several grounds as set-out in the Memorandum of appeal.
An attempt was made on behalf of the claimant that the rider of the offending vehicle Mr.B.A.Ravi Kumar is his neighbor and he did not stop the vehicle. In this Court also, he has adhered to the said contention. The same cannot be accepted. The reason is simple. In view of the fact that the rider - Dinesh himself hit the cow and caused the accident, hence the contention that the neighbor B.A.Ravi Kumar did not stop the
NC: 2024:KHC:9251 MFA No. 605 of 2013
vehicle is satisfactorily hopeless. The Tribunal extenso referred to the material on record and rightly rejected the claim petition. I find no reasons to interfere with the Judgment and award of the Tribunal.
For the reasons stated above, the appeal is devoid of merits and the same is liable to be rejected.
rejected
Sd/JUDGE
TKN List No.: 2 Sl No.: 3.1
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the rejection of the claim petition by the Tribunal is just and proper.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
B.A.DINESH S/O B.R.VENKATEGOWDA
B.A.RAVIKUMAR
THE MANAGER, THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD.
JYOTI MULIMANI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
