NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY Vs. BARAMAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE second respondent - insurance company in MVC. No. 565/2006 on the file of MACT -V, Jamkhandi, has come up in this appeal impugning the judgment and award dated 25.5.2007 in awarding compensation for the alleged injuries suffered by claimant in a road traffic accident said to have taken place on 26.1.2006.

(2.) BRIEF facts leading to this appeal are as under: The case of claimant before Tribunal is that on 26.1.2006 while he was going back to his house from his field, he was hit by motor cycle bearing No. KA -25/X.0863 belonging to first respondent, insured with second respondent before Tribunal. It is stated that in said accident, he suffered fracture of middle shaft of tibia of right leg and other injuries. It is also his case that immediately after accident he took treatment for the alleged injuries and thereafter, filed police complaint and subsequently, filed claim petition seeking compensation from the owner and insurer of offending vehicle, which has caused accident.

(3.) HEARD the Counsel for appellant and contesting respondent -claimant. The first line of argument of appellant -insurance company is that claim is fraudulent one, inasmuch as, documents regarding accident are concocted and created for the sake of this case. It is brought to the notice of this Court that accident has taken place on 26.1.2006 at about 8.00 p.m., near the village where claimant is residing. According to claimant, the person who hit him is none other than resident of his village, namely, Manjunathagouda, second respondent in this appeal and said Manjunathagouda took him to his house and said that he would provide medical assistance to him. The next day around 11.45 am., claimant went to KIMS Hospital, Hubli, where x -ray was taken, wherein it was seen that he had suffered fracture of middle shaft of tibia and other injuries, for which, he underwent treatment. Thereafter, he filed complaint on 22.2.2006 contending that since Manjunathagouda, the person who caused accident did not provide expenses for treatment, hence he is filing complaint against him. Based on said complaint, FIR was registered, charge sheet was filed and thereafter, claim petition was pursued.