B.K. MAHENDRA KUMAR S/O SRI. T. KRISHNACHAR Vs. SRI H.T. JAGADEESH S/O T. THIMMAIAH OWNER OF LORRY BEARING, SRI. SEENA P. S/O PANCHALAIAH DRIVER OF LORRY BEARING AND THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal by the claimant is directed against the judgment and award dated 4.4.2009 passed in MVC No. 2061/09 by the MACT and Court of Small Causes (SCCH -7) Bangalore City dismissing the claim petition filed by the Appellant -claimant.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are: The Appellant -claimant filed the claim petition before the tribunal claiming compensation in respect of the injuries which he had sustained in the motor accident that, took place on 2.10.2006 at about 7.30 a.m. near Baptist hospital situated on Bangalore -Bellary road involving the lorry bearing Regn. No. KA -05 C 9122, owned by the first Respondent driven by the second Respondent and insured with the third Respondent at the relevant point of time. In the impugned accident, the claimant sustained grievous injuries comprising of fracture for which he took treatment in the hospital by spending huge amount. Despite the same, he is not completely cured of the injuries. As such, he is unable to discharge his functions as an official of the High Court which has come in the way of his promotional prospects. Accordingly, he sought for grant of compensation from the Respondents.

(3.) THE first Respondent -owner contended that the accident has not taken place on account of the negligent driving of the lorry by its driver -Respondent No. 2. It was specifically contended that the lorry owned by him is not at all involved in the accident, on the other hand, it has been falsely planted in the east as having been involved in the accident. He also denied the age, avocation, the injuries sustained, treatment taken and the amount spent for the same by the claimant. It was further contended that the lorry in question had been insured by him with the third Respondent at the relevant point of time and if for any reason he is held liable, the liability to pay any compensation be saddled on the third Respondent -insurer.