NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. KRISHNAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE insurer who had been permitted to contest the claim proceedings under section 170 of the Motor vehicles Act, 1988 by the Tribunal is the appellant in this appeal against the judgment and award dated 27. 6. 2000 in M. V. C. No. 26 of 1998 on the file of the Principal Civil judge and Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kolar. The respondent No. 1 herein was the claimant in the said claim petition. The respondent No. 2 herein who is the owner of the vehicle involved in the accident was the respondent No. 1 before the tribunal. The appellant herein was the respondent No. 2. Respondent No. 3 before the Tribunal who was the driver has not been impleaded in this appeal.

(2.) THE claimant filed M. V. C. No. 26 of 1998 alleging that on 17. 7. 1997 he was riding the scooter bearing No. KA-05-E-7892 near Chatrakodihalli on the road leading from Kolar-Takel with one C. M. Venkatareddy as a pillion rider; that at that time, a school Tempo van bearing No. MEB 3191 came from the opposite direction being driven in a rash and negligent manner; and that the said Tempo suddenly came to the wrong side of the road and dashed against the scooterist who was driving the said scooter on the correct side of the road cautiously. Consequently, the rider and pillion rider of the scooter sustained grievous injuries. He, therefore, filed the said claim petition claiming compensation of Rs. 10,00,000. Both the owner and insurer resisted the claim petition. The tribunal had framed appropriate issues in regard to the occurrence of the accident, sustaining of injuries, negligence and quantum of compensation. The issues framed by the Tribunal are as follows:

(3.) COMMON evidence was recorded in m. V. C. No. 26 of 1998 filed by the respondent No. 1 herein and M. V. C. No. 28 of 1998 filed by the pillion rider. The claimant in M. V. C. No. 26 of 1998 was examined as PW 1 and the pillion rider who was the claimant in M. V. C. No. 28 of 1998 was examined as PW 2. The two doctors who treated the claimant were examined as PWs 3 and 4. Exhs. P-1 to p-355 were marked on behalf of the petitioner. On behalf of the respondents no evidence was let in.