MUNIYAPPA Vs. SARASWATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two appeals are filed by the claimant as well as the owner of the vehicle, being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 2 -7 -2011 made in MVC No. 15/2010 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Challakere (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'). MFA No. 7995/2011 was filed by the claimant in MVC No. 15/2010 being not satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. MFA 8619/2011 was filed by the owner of the offending vehicle, being aggrieved by the very same judgment and award passed by the Tribunal fixing the liability on the owner of the vehicle to compensate the claimant.

(2.) THE facts of the case are as follows: The claimant in his claim petition has contended that on 30 -8 -2009 at about 6.00 p.m., the Vykunta Mahadevi bus bearing registration No. KA -16/A -9936 came from Chitradurga to the bus stand of Challakere and the driver of the said bus wanted to take the bus in reverse direction and to park in the platform. The claimant who was working as a cleaner -cum -conductor got down from the bus and while signaling the driver to take the bus back in reverse direction towards the platform, all of a sudden, the driver took the bus in reverse direction with a high speed and in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the claimant. Due to the accident, the claimant fell down and sustained injuries. Immediately, after the accident, he was shifted to the Government Hospital at Challakere and thereafter Government Hospital at Chitradurga. In the accident., he has sustained the following injuries:

(3.) THE owner of the vehicle filed objections to the claim petition denying the averments made in the claim petition and also contended that the claimant was not working as a cleaner or a conductor in the bus owned by her. She was not paying any salary to him. She also denied the accident, age, occupation and income of the claimant. Since the vehicle is covered by insurance, if there is any injuries to the claimant due to the accident, the Insurer has to compensate the claimant and sought for dismissal of the claim petition as against the first respondent.