Vijendra Somappa v. The Managing Director

((((((((((((HC-KAR, NC:(2026:KHC:43958( MFA(No.(6296(of(2023( C/W(MFA(No.(5194(of(2023( ,,,,,,,,,, , CNR:(KAHC010479972023( ( ( IN(THE(HIGH(COURT(OF(KARNATAKA(AT(BENGALURU(

THDATED(THIS(THE(17 (DAY(OF(AUGUST,(2026(

BEFORE(

THE(HON'BLE(MR.(JUSTICE(T.M.NADAF(

MISCELLANEOUS(FIRST(APPEAL(NO.6296(OF(2023(MV-I)(

C/W(

MISCELLANEOUS(FIRST(APPEAL(NO.5194(OF(2023(MV-I)(

( IN(MFA(No.(6296/2023:( BETWEEN:( VIJENDRA,SOMAPPA,, AGED,ABOUT,39,YEARS,, ST R/AT,NO.18/1,,1 ,,MAIN,, TH 4 ,,CROSS,,VEVEKNAGAR,, BENGALURU,-,563,122,,

, PERMANENT,R/OF,OBALAPURA,, MEDIMALLASANDRA,,

BENGALURU,RURAL,DISTRICT,-,562,132., …APPELLANT, (BY,SRI.,GURUDEV,PRASAD,K,T.,,ADVOCATE), Digitally AND:(signedtiby REKHA0R THE,MANAGING,DIRECTOR,, Location: BMTC,DIVISION,,K.H.,ROAD,, High0Court SHANTHINAGAR,, of0Karnataka BENGALURU., …RESPONDENT, (BY,SRI.,D.,VIJAYAKUMAR.,,ADVOCATE), , THIS,MFA,IS,FILED,UNDER,SECTION,173(1),OF,MV,ACT,, AGAINST, THE, JUDGMENT, AND, AWARD, DATED:25.05.2023, PASSED, IN, MVC, NO.2984/2021, ON, THE, FILE, OF, THE, XV, ADDITIONAL, SMALL, CAUSES, JUDGE, AND, XXIII, ACMM,, MAYO, HALL, UNIT,, MACT,, BENGALURU,, (SCCH-19),, , PARTLY, ((((((((((((HC-KAR, NC:(2026:KHC:43958( MFA(No.(6296(of(2023( C/W(MFA(No.(5194(of(2023( ,,,,,,,,,, , CNR:(KAHC010479972023( ( ( ALLOWING, THE, CLAIM, PETITION, FOR, COMPENSATION, AND, SEEKING,ENHANCEMENT,OF,COMPENSATION.,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, IN(MFA(NO.5194/2023:, BETWEEN:, THE,MANAGING,DIRECTOR, BMTC,DIVISON,, K.H.,ROAD,,SHANTHINAGAR,, BANGALORE,-,560,027., ...APPELLANT, (BY,SRI.,VIJAY,KUMAR,D.,,ADVOCATE), AND:, SRI.,VIJENDRA,, S/O,SOMAPPA,, AGED,ABOUT,39,YEARS,, STR/AT,NO.18/1,,1 ,,MAIN,, TH4 ,,CROSS,,VEVEKNAGAR,, BENGALURU,-,563,122,, , PERMANENT,R/OF,OBALAPURA,, MEDIMALLASANDRA,, BENGALURU,RURAL,DISTRICT,-,562,132., ...RESPONDENT, (BY,SRI.,GURUDEV,PRASAD,K.T.,,ADVOCATE), ,,,,,,,,,,THIS,MFA,IS,FILED,UNDER,SECTION,173(1),OF,MV, ACT,, AGAINST, THE, JUDGMENT, AND, AWARD, DATED:25.05.2023,PASSED,IN,MVC,NO.2984/2021,ON,THE, FILE,OF,THE,XV,ADDITIONAL,SMALL,CAUSES,JUDGE,AND, XXIII,ACMM,,COURT,OF,SMALL,CAUSES,,MACT,,MAYO,HALL, UNIT,, BENGALURU,, (SCCH-19),, AWARDING, COMPENSATION, OF, RS.4,61,600/-, WITH, INTEREST, AT, 6, PERCENT, P.A., FROM, THE, DATE, OF, PETITION, TILL, ITS, REALIZATION.,, , , THESE, APPEALS,, COMING, ON, FOR, ADMISSION,, THIS, DAY,,JUDGMENT,WAS,DELIVERED,THEREIN,AS,UNDER:, ,

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF ORAL JUDGMENT These appeals being MFA No.5194/2023 and MFA No.6296/2023 by the Corporation as well as the claimant, assailing the Judgment and Award dated 25.05.2023 passed by the MACT, Bengaluru (SCCH-19) in MVC No.2934/2021.

¶2Both the appeals are filed calling in question the liability i.e., contributory negligence, by the Corporation for considering higher percentage on the claimant and also quantum. Whereas the Claimant for setting aside the same and also on quantum.

¶3The parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Tribunal.

¶4Facts germane to file the present appeals are as under:

In an accident occurred on 05.04.2021 at about 9:30 am, involving the two wheeler bearing Registration No.KA-

01/EY-8603 and BMTC bus bearing Registration No.KA-57/F-3276, on Outer ring road, from Ibbaluru towards Agra, near Military camp gate, the claimant who was the rider of the motorcycle received grievous injuries, resulting in disability. The Tribunal after going through the evidence placed on record, both ocular and documentary, comes to the conclusion that both the rider of the motorcycle and driver of the BMTC bus have contributed at the ratio of 40:60 respectively to the accident and awarded total compensation of Rs.7,69,207/- with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization, directing the BMTC to deposit 60% of compensation awarded ie., Rs.4,61,525/- rounded off at Rs.4,61,600/- along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of petition, till realization. It is this Judgment passed by the Tribunal is called in question in these appeals, both on liability as well as quantum, as stated afore.

¶5Heard, Sri.D.Vijaya Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the Corporation and Sri.K.T.Guru Prasad, learned counsel appearing for the Claimant.

¶6Sri.D.Vijaya Kumar, with all vehemence submits that, as per the complaint as well as spot sketch, the rider of the two wheeler ventured to enter into the lane which was especially ear marked for BMTC Buses and rendered contributory negligence, which has resulted in an unfortunate accident. In that view of the matter, the contributory negligence ought to have been saddled at least 80% on the motorcyclist and 20% on the BMTC bus. Learned counsel further submits that in the event, this Court is of the opinion that contributory negligence be considered at lesser rate, then the same must not be lesser than 50% towards both the rider as well as driver of the BMTC bus. So far as quantum is concerned, he submits that the Tribunal has awarded exorbitant

compensation under all the heads and the same requires reconsideration and sought to allow the appeal.

¶7In contrast, Sri.K.T.Guru Prasad, submits that the BMTC though examined its driver and produced copy of the complaint, however not led any independent evidence to contend that it is the rider of the motorcycle who was responsible for the accident. The contents of the complaint clearly shows that the bus came from the hind side in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the motorcycle, which has resulted in severe injuries resulting in disability, and sought to set-aside the finding of the Tribunal fastening contributory negligence on the rider of the motorcycle. So far as enhancement is concerned, learned counsel submits that, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is inadequate when compared to the injuries suffered, disability resulted and the treatment undergone and expenses incurred and

sought to allow the appeal filed by claimant and dismiss the appeal by the Corporation.

¶8Having considered the rival submissions, this Court has gone through both the appeal papers as well as the Trial Court record.

¶9As observed by the Tribunal, in the cross-examination, a specific suggestion was made to the rider /claimant/ PW.1, wherein he has categorically admitted the suggestion stating that 'there is a separate bus lane made for BMTC buses only'. He has further admitted that 'accident took place on the bus lane'. Though he has denied the suggestion that he entered the bus lane and responsible for the accident, but the witness voluntarily stated that, there was heavy traffic and he was taking left side, at that time the bus came from hind side and dashed against the motorcycle.

¶10The claimant in the complaint, has clearly stated as under: "F ¢£À ¢£ÁAPÀ 05/04/2021 gÀAzÀÄ £À£Àß vÁ¬ÄAiÀÄ ªÀÄ£É N§¼Á¥ÀÄgÀ ºÉƸÀPÉÆÃmÉUÉ ºÉÆÃV ªÁ¥À¸ÀÄì £À£Àß ªÀÄ£ÉUÉ §gÀ®Ä £À£Àß ºÉÆÃAqÁ rAiÉÆà UÁr £ÀA§gï PÉJ 01 JªÉÊ 8603 gÀ°è ºÉÆgÀªÀvÀÄð® gÀ¸ÉÛAiÀÄ°è E§â®ÆgÀÄ PÀqɬÄAzÀ ºÀUÀgÀ PÀqÉUÉ ªÀÄÄRågÀ¸ÉÛAiÀÄ°è ºÉÆÃUÀÄwÛzÀÄÝ, E§â®ÆgÀÄ «Ä°Öç PÁåA¥ï ºÀwÛgÀ ªÀÄÄRå gÀ¸ÉÛAiÀÄ°è mÁæ¦üPï eÁªÀiï DVzÀÝ PÁgÀt ¨É¼ÀUÉÎ ¸ÀĪÀiÁgÀÄ 09-30 UÀAmÉ ¸ÀªÀÄAiÀÄzÀ°è ºÉÆÃUÀÄwÛzÀÝ £Á£ÀÄ £À£Àß UÁrAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ªÀÄÄRågÀ¸ÉÛAiÀÄ°ègÀĪÀ §¸ï ¯ÉãïUÉ ZÀ°¹zÉÝ. CzÉà ªÉüÉUÉ §AzÀÄ ©JAn¹ §¸ÀÄì ZÁ®PÀ §¸Àì£ÀÄß §¸ï¯Éãï£À°è ZÁ®£É ªÀiÁrPÉÆAqÀÄ §AzÀÄ £À£Àß ¸ÀÆÌljUÉ rQÌ ªÀiÁrzÀÄÝ ¥ÀjuÁªÀÄ £Á£ÀÄ UÁr ¸ÀªÉÄÃvÀ gÀ¸ÉÛAiÀÄ°è ©zÁÝUÀ £À£Àß UÁr qÁåªÉÄÃeï DVzÀÄÝ £À£Àß JqÀ ªÉÆtPÁ°£À ªÉÄÃ¯É ¸ÀzÀj ©JAn¹ §¹ì£À ªÀÄÄA¢£À §® ZÀPÀæ ºÀjzÀÄ ¥ÀjuÁªÀÄ £À£Àß PÁ®Ä ªÀÄÄjzÀÄ vÀÄA§ gÀPÀÛUÁAiÀĪÁ¬ÄvÀÄ."

¶11The Tribunal considering the cross-examination coupled with the averments made in the complaint, was of the opinion that the accident occurred only when the claimant ventured to rode in the lane which was especially ear marked as bus lane and it is also clearly stated in the spot sketch. In that view of the matter, fastened the

contributory negligence at 40% on the rider of the motorcycle and 60% on the driver of the bus.

¶12Though the motorcycle entered in the bus lane, the traffic in the said road was very heavy. The bus being a heavy vehicle, the driver ought to have exercised more caution and little circumspect to apprehend any such actions by any of the road user, in view of traffic involved in the road and ought to have driven the bus with more cautiousness. The said aspect of the matter is lacking in the case on hand. Mere fact that a person entered the lane specified to the bus, cannot give license to the driver of the bus to cause accident and to contend that since the person entered the bus lane, he is responsible for the accident coming in the free flow of the bus. In that view of the matter, the Tribunal after considering the entire material on record, has properly fastened contributory negligence on both, rider of the motorcycle and driver of the bus.

¶13Another reason for this Court to sustain the contributory negligence fastened on the driver of the bus is that, he was the last person having an opportunity to avoid the accident. Such caution was absent at the time of accident on the part of the driver of the bus. In that view of the matter, there is no interference required on the point of liability.

¶14So far as quantum is concerned, this Court after going through the entire material on record, is of the opinion that the Tribunal has awarded 'just compensation' in respect of the injuries sustained.

¶15For the reasons stated above, both the appeals fails and sans merits and are accordingly, dismissed.

¶16The amount in deposit in the Corporation's appeal shall be transmitted to the concerned Tribunal forthwith for disbursement.

¶17The Corporation shall deposit balance compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum, awarded by the Tribunal at the ratio of 60%, within six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶18On deposit, the entire amount shall be released in favor of the claimant on proper identification.

¶19Trial Court record, shall be transmitted to the concerned Tribunal forthwith, without causing any delay.

¶20Given the facts and circumstances of the case, no order as to costs.

¶21In view of dismissal of the appeals, pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of.

Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE

TKN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14