(1.) Eight days delay in filing the appeal by the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation, for short "KSRTC" is sought to be explained in the affidavit of Assistant Law Officer stating that on the receipt of a certified copy of the judgment and award from the concerned advocate in MVC No. 8841/2007, same was examined by the Divisional Office and thereafter forwarded to the Central Office and on receipt of the certified copy from the Divisional Office, the Chief Law Officer was of the opinion that the award passed should be challenged in the High Court whence it was entrusted to the lawyer on the panel, hence the appeal.
(2.) The averments in the affidavit smacks of suppression of relevant material facts and dates. Material dates and material facts are not forthcoming. Negligence, inaction and lack of bona fides is attributable to the appellant. Misc. Cvl. No. 16074/11 is rejected.
(3.) Having had a glimpse at the judgment and award dated 24-7-2010 in MVC No. 8841/07 of the XII Addl. Small Causes Judge and Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore, for short "MACT" indisputably, the accident occurred on the Bangalore-Mysore road which has a width of 100 feet when the claimant was crossing the road and the motor vehicle being a bus belonging to the appellant dashed against the claimant causing grievous injury leading to amputation of the left limb below knee level and other injuries. The MACT having noticed that the driver of the offending vehicle was not examined, where as one traffic inspector was examined as RW-1 who admitted in cross-examination that he is not an eye-witness, declined to accept the testimony as credible evidence. However having noticed that the accident was on the main thoroughfare between Mysore and Bangalore, attributed 25% contributory negligence to the claimant and 75% to the driver of the bus. The finding attributing 25% contributory negligence is neither based upon any issue framed nor a contention advanced by the appellant-Corporation in the statement of objections.