DIVISIONAL MANAGER Vs. AKASH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals are by the Insurance Company as well as by the claimant, calling in question the correctness of the Judgment & Award dated 05.04.2018 in MVC No.92/2016 by the learned Senior Civil Judge & MACT, Chittapur.

(2.) The claim petition proceeded on the allegation that on 09.01.2015 at about 8.30 p.m. the claimant was riding a motor cycle bearing Reg.No.KA-32/EG-8808 in order to return to his house and while he was near Satya Hospital on Anand Hotel to Court Cross Main Road of Kalaburagi, a car bearing Reg.No.KA-32/M- 9624 driven by its driver in high speed came from the inner side of Satya Hospital in a rash and negligent manner and dashed to the motor cycle resulting in the claimant falling down to the road causing grievous injuries to him. The claim petition filed in this behalf was allowed in part by awarding a compensation of Rs.30,18,000/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization.

(3.) Learned counsel for the Insurance Company submitted in support of its appeal in MFA No.202337/2018 that there was delay in the FIR which creates a suspicion about the involvement of the offending vehicle in causing the accident and, accordingly, Insurance Company has filed this appeal. However, pursuant to a direction issued by us, learned counsel for the Insurance Company has graciously filed a memo enclosing thereto Accident Intimation Letter dated 10.01.2015 submitted by the owner of the offending vehicle to the appellant - Insurance Company. Perusal of the said Accident Intimation Letter shows that the owner of the offending vehicle has in terms admitted the accident but he has given a slightly different version regarding the manner of happening of the accident. In that view of the matter, learned counsel for the Insurance Company further submits that the finding of the learned Tribunal that the driver of the offending vehicle was negligent in causing the accident is not supported by the evidence placed before the Tribunal. She further submits that learned Tribunal has awarded excessive amount under the head of medical expenses and it is not borne out from the bills produced by the claimant.