HASMATHBI Vs. YELLAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The unfortunate claimants are before this Court for enhancement against the impugned judgment and award dtd. 23/10/2014 made in MVC No.384/2013 on the file of the Prl. Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Gulbarga, ('Tribunal' for short) awarding compensation of Rs.9,53,000.00 with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till deposit.

(2.) The claimants are the widow, two minor children, handicapped brother and mother of the deceased. The claimants filed claim petition before the MACT contending that on 22/4/2013, the deceased Mohd. Javeed Shaikh along with one Basha had been to Pattan village from Nellur on motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-32/W-7225. The deceased was riding the motor cycle. At about 10.45 pm, when they reached near Jawali Dhaba on Gulbarga-Aland Road, the car bearing registration No.MH-03/4060 came from Aland side in a very high speed and in rash and negligent manner and dashed against the motorcycle from back side, due to which the deceased and the pillion rider fell down on the ground and the deceased sustained multiple injuries all over the body. Immediately, he was shifted to Government Hospital, Gulbarga, where the doctors has referred for higher treatment to Basaveshwara Hospital and during the treatment, he succumbed to the injuries. Prior to the incident, deceased was hale and healthy and was doing carpentry supervisor work under Nirmal Builder and Developer, Mumbai, and was getting monthly income of Rs.15,000.00 and out of the said income, he was maintaining the family and the claimants were dependent on the earnings of the deceased. Due to untimely death, the claimants are put to hardship. It was further contended that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending car by its driver and 2nd respondent being the insurer, is liable to pay the compensation.

(3.) The 1st Respondent filed written statement denying the averments made in the claim petition including the age, occupation and income of the deceased. It was contended that he being the driver of the offending car, was holding valid and effective driving licence as on the date of the accident and since the car was insured with the 2nd respondent, he is not liable to pay the compensation and prayed for dismissal of the claim petition.