RAMACHANDRA Vs. SHEKAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Appellant, who is the claimant in MVC No. 465/2010, being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 28.11.2011 passed by the Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal IX, Mudhol ('MACT' for short) filed this appeal.

(2.) THE appellant filed the claim petition contending that, on 06.09.2008 at about 8.00 am, he was travelling in a Tom Tom Auto Rickshaw bearing registration No. KA29 -5746 from Gaddanakeri to Kataraki village. When the Auto Rickshaw, in which the claimant was travelling came near Ghataprabha Canal, another Tom Tom Auto Rickshaw bearing registration No. KA29 -6436 came from the opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner and lost control over the driving, which results in dashing against the Tom Tom Auto Rickshaw bearing registration No. KA29 -5746. Due to the said accident, the claimant sustained fracture of the right leg and injuries to other parts of the body. He was admitted to Kumareshwar Hospital, Bagalkot and undergone operations. Steel rod was implanted. He was inpatient for a period of 45 days and spent more than Rs. 80,000/ - towards the treatment. Prior to the accident, he was doing business and earning more than Rs. 4,500/ - per month. At the time of accident, he was aged about 50 years and sought for compensation of Rs. 6,10,000/ -.

(3.) THE 2nd respondent Insurance Company filed the written statement and denied the entire averment and contended that the Tom Tom Auto Rickshaw bearing Registration No. KA29 -6436 is a commercial vehicle carrying goods. The owner of the vehicle violated the conditions of the policy. Further, it was contended that driver of the Tom Tom Auto Rickshaw was not holding a valid and effective driving licence at the time of the accident and hence the insurer is not liable to compensate the claimant and sought for dismissal of the claim petition.