S.D.HANUMAN Vs. SRINIVAS S.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal is filed by the claimants under Sec. 173 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the learned XVI Addl.Judge, Court of Small Causes and and Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, (SCCH-14), Bengaluru, (hereinafter for brevity referred to as 'the Tribunal'), in its judgment and award dtd. 6/4/2015, in M.V.C.No.3335/2014.

(2.) The summary of the case of the present appellants as claimants before the Tribunal was that, the claimants are the parents of the deceased Shashidhar, who was said to be aged 20 years at the time of the accident and was a student. On the date 24/6/2014, at about 12.45 p.m., while the deceased was travelling in Toyota Innova Car bearing registration No.KA-53-N-7776, along with his friends to Davanagere from Bengaluru, near SSIM Hospital, Railway Underpass Bridge, Davanagere, due to the rash and negligent driving by the driver of the said motorcar, it dashed against a Tractor-Trailor bearing registration No.KA-17-TA-7115 and MEW 8891. Due to the said road traffic accident, deceased Shashidhar sustained grievous injuries on his head, chest and other parts of the body. Though he was immediately shifted to the nearest SSIM Hospital, however, he succumbed to the injuries while being taken to the hospital. The contention of the claimants being the parents of the deceased Shashidhar is that, prior to the accident, the deceased was studying in Engineering course and was also working as a part-time Data Operator and Sales Executive in M/s.Olympic Sports and earning more than Rs.30,000.00 per month. Due to the untimely death of deceased Shashidhar, the parents are put to great loss and mental agony. With this, the claimants have claimed compensation of a sum of Rs.35.00 lakhs with interest thereupon from respondent Nos.1 and 2, arraying them as the owner and insurer of the alleged offending vehicle i.e., Toyota Innova Car bearing registration No.KA-53-N-7776.

(3.) In response to the notice, it is only respondent No.2-Insurance Company, appearing through its learned counsel, filed its written statement and the respondent No.1 had remained ex parte. In its written statement, the respondent No.2-Insurance Company denied the manner of occurrence of road traffic accident, the age and the alleged studentship of the deceased. However, it admitted the issuance of policy in favour of respondent No.1 with respect to Toyota Innova Car bearing registration No.KA-53-N-7776.