RAJU ADITYAN Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned counsel for the appellant has filed a memo praying that the notice to respondent No. 2 who is the owner of the vehicle may be dispensed with as the liability of the respondent No. 1, the insurance company is admitted. Mr. Yoga Narasimha, learned Counsel for the respondent No. 1 submits that he has no objection to dispense with notice to respondent No. 2. Accordingly, notice to respondent No. 2 is dispensed with.

(2.) Though this appeal is listed in the orders list, since the appeal is of the year 1994, with consent of the learned Counsel for the appellant and the respondent No. 1, this appeal is taken up for final hearing and disposed of by this order.

(3.) The appellant in this appeal is a victim of an unfortunate accident that had taken place on 9.1.1993 at about 11.30 p.m. when he was returning from the mills of Subhadra Textiles of Magadi Main Road on his bicycle after attending his duties as a spinner in the mills of Subhadra Textiles. On account of injuries sustained by the appellant in the accident in question, he made a claim before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') claiming for award of compensation of Rs. 2,25,000/-. The appellant examined himself as PW 1 and examined one Dr. Chandramoulesh who is the Head of the Department of Neurosurgery, Victoria Hospital, who had treated him as PW 2.