KALLAPPA Vs. NAGESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals are by the claimant and insurer challenging the judgment and award dated 08.03.2013 passed in MVC No 1105/2010 on the file of the Member, MACT-XII, Vijayapur (for short 'the Tribunal').

(2.) The appellant-claimant filed a claim petition before the Tribunal claiming compensation of Rs.7,00,000/- on account of injuries suffered by him in the road traffic accident, which occurred on 15.03.2010 when he was travelling as a pillion rider on a motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-53/L- 3895, due to rash and negligent riding of the vehicle by its rider. The Tribunal awarded compensation of 1,84,000/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization directing the insurer to deposit the compensation amount with interest. Being aggrieved by the same, both, the claimant and the insurer are before this Court in their respective appeals.

(3.) The grounds taken by the appellant-insurer are that there is delay of 15 days in lodging the complaint and the said delay has not been explained properly. The Tribunal dismissed the claim petition in MVC No.1106/2010 filed by the complainant since he failed to proceed with the case. Ex.R2-Investigation Report clearly shows that on the date of accident the complainant was riding the motorcycle, since he was not holding the Driving Licence to drive the motorcycle the name one Nagesh, who is 1st respondent, was implicated as driver of the offending motorcycle and lodged the false complaint after lapse of 15 days of accident. Learned counsel for the insurer contends that as per Ex.P6-Wound Certificate the date of accident is 16.02010 and not 15.02010 and in Ex.P6 the cause of accident is stated as fall from the motorcycle and it may be not due to reason shown by the claimant in the claim petition. All these aspects create suspicion regarding accident. It is her further contention that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the higher side. PW2-Doctor who issued disability certificate is a General Surgeon and not a Neuro or Orthopedic Surgeon to depose upon the nature of injuries sustained by the claimant. Therefore, she submits to allow the appeal.