BACAi ORE v. I T\

SRI N. T. RA1L\MAT1 ti: LLA RHAN ASSUR. 1A1.’KS, 13/1 1, P. V. K. IEOAI) SHNNKAR \P PA i3ANGALOR1H — 4. flfl’ThT’’D1 ‘T’[fl j1L 1 j\L r-1\irnU,\, N F CARL XRISING MOPES LX I LID I. 0,143/5. BE.\1PGHAJFAHALLI. (DLI) MADRAS ROAD. D0OINNV4NiNT’I? P T ‘‘flj’ Ofli\ (jruk’ic,

4. TFIE DIVISIONAL MANAGER. (DRIF Ni XI INS’ El V RD NOb R’\ \sU\’R”N NO364/l 10, iO ‘B MAIN, 3RD BLOCK, JAYANAGAR. BANGALORE 1 çr 1 THE *\NV1\( DIRECTOR. BM/LC., KHROAID, SHANTHINAGAR. BANOALORE 27:, (By V/S. LAWYERS GUILD, ALMS. FOR R. 1, Ri/SPUN DENTS SRI D X’ 14 0 F KI MAR D\ POP p a —ç P.2 \cDt3(’L’ U1SPLNSE1) Will II \ ) S 1 THIS MEA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV AGT AGAINST TE1E JUDO NlEN’I.’ AN I.) AWARE) DATED: 14. I , 2008 PASS ED IN: ‘\C NO. 5232/2003 ON THE. PILL OF TIlE KIN ADDL .JUDGL. COURT (DL SYLILL CA USES. MLMBRR. MACT. METROPOLITAN (SOC I I NO. I 7), PARTLY FOR POMEN5 \ITGN A’ ‘ )L PETITION \‘IN( 1 MPN F 13A1.l G.ALO RE, ( UNIV ALLOY/LW TF1 F S, P520 ARU•A, ‘i \C “ c — c S (.‘ A ;;. tW 01111 dl 111 )Da.I (1 1 (‘.}U lOi (U.: C 111/. . Ia R 10111114 4 JUDGMENT As these appeals are arising out of a common judgment and award passed by the Tribunal they are taken tip for consideration together.

2. As no dispute regarding injuries sustained by the claimants In a road traffic accident occurred on 17.09.2005 due to involvement of BMTC bus bearing registration No. KA-0 1-F- 1588 and a private bus bearing registration No. KA 05 4800 the only points that arise for consideration in these appeals are: Whether the Tribunal Is justified in holding that the accident was occurred due to contributory negligence on the part of drivers of both the BMTC bus and private bus 50% each? Whether quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal Is just and reasonable or does it call 11w enhancement?

3. Learned Conitsel for the BMTC submits that In MVC No. 3 196/2006 arising out of the very same accident the Tribunal has held that the accident was occurred due to sole negligence on the part of the driver Ii C 4 TX d b IC I I r r ( C I Ii r iii i M 6 C S 1)) 41% r C I C c I I a 6 against the driver of private bits and charge sheet has been filed agaisni him. The Tribunal considering the same In MVC NC). 13196/2005 has held that accident was occurred due to sole negligence on the part of the driver of the private bus. Therefore the Impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal in the instant case in so far its finding on negligence is liable to be modified and accordingly it is held that the accident was occurred due to sole negligent driving of private bus by Its driver as has been held by the Tribunal in MVC No. 13196/2005 against which no appeal has been filed by the Insurer of private bus.

6. Now. I have to see whether compensation awarded by the Tribunal Is just and reasonable or does It call for enhancement?

7. As per wound certificate Ex. p 6, claknant had sustained crush injury to her right middle finger and later it was amputated. lujuries sustained by her are also evident from Meclieal CertitIcate Ex. p 5 OPD card Ex. P 7 T’l’oict&i 1l’l% L I’ S \etutivcs E P 8(i) dUd clIpI)orted 1w oral t’titl’iic.’ t’I ilw i laIflliifl Ct.Inuiil(’tl I lW 1 Slit iI:) t’’ t’\aflhIia( d flit cInior rtiare1iiit (1% hii’t. S. C onsiclerine ;IrnlniLttI 1(311 of ricdn rnhldk tmntstr a Lifl1 •)i I%.2n.O(Ifl: i awadrd towards puin and siiffennsz as uait s’ R..1 ,.000/ avard1 hi

9. ihe ci tirnani h:is not fJrncltle4 (I an medic al bilk teard’nj.. .un.nini ‘t.iI tnwai (1% trcatnlfnt t icr’! it it. OC )‘ v I C cli Lii t rnl&n ‘r i -‘ ‘1 I. ntural tova L r r ‘iS’ I ( :11(1 thvre 1 c ij’t I i nh u tIIlL 1, II LI .Iiiili • 1 — ini , ‘‘i’iIdt ;& •i €I(41: IWI t’i’;iit1 :. z’’ilz — ‘‘.Ir. i,:: tj, ‘jj1 “ii )!i Ii. IQ I I — i — It I at . ) flat’ aa.... 11% * S • II i 1’ ‘Iii “U ‘I Inju ic’s t Wi( si t ha1 sla nusi h’L ( b’ en nndei t ‘• v I ‘ i I 1’ “r’ ii a’rt It ‘it • nuiI )I t%)QçJfl, I’ n in t U torar Is loss 1)1 lii (‘lilt’ ‘l’Uhii., I fli L J’ 1 11(1(1 ci a4um,4 k’ 15,tn)O/ .i ai Inc In tI Iiili j IL. In iii’’ tb—,c ucv ‘ itlcncr ut clot tor reg irdhiw disability the I lil)•i i ial considennt! amputation ef n dc Ic hi er i S a d n ar)Ot ft o tie iii I 11 t ‘ I I IciC e lutur’- life liw i itl’t Jy aw irded a sum Rs 20 000/ iowcirds I(i%S ‘‘ ;ilI•’li’Ii’S. Rs.23.000/ inwards ‘I it lit a I s U I ‘It I a I ii- ‘n 31 tic k. K C )1’t I It kr t tilianc t flk’J till’ :t’I ‘ I” •‘ ‘ ‘ tt’ In. 1: 1 I 1 ii C I ‘t iThV ‘1. ;s11J’ “1 ?tI )! — U • ‘ i• •; ...II’:’. 1( ‘b C • a 2’ •(N) I •‘ •‘ &!‘ ‘‘1 ‘ a :. ) t 9 5) 6) Towards disability Towards mental shock, Agony & depression Rs. 23.000/- Rs. 5,000/- Total Less compensation awarded by The Tribunal Rs. 92,000/- Rs. 55,000/- Additional compensation Comes to Its. 37,000/-

13. Accordingly both the appeals are allowed in part. Judgment and award of the Tribunal both on negligence and quantum is modified and it is held that the accident was occurred due to sole rash and negligent driving of private bus by it’s driver. The claimant is entitled for an additional compensation of Rs.37,000/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of claim petition till the date of realisation.

14. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the entire compensation awarded by the Tribunal as well as the additional compensation awarded by this Court. together with interest within two months from the date of receipt of a eop’ of this judgment and the same is ordered to be released in lávour of the claimant. a- S 10 15 The am ‘tint. dposjt4j [is’ 81j4fl’ In ffij anpeal is ordcnrj to bt refit ndecj to It as IIabjjjy I, held agaIn the Ulsuwi off tIM pift ate bus. Nuorcfrr is ton55 Sd!