Bangalore District CourtNot Mentioned In This Regard In His ... vs No.1 Has Not Adduced Any Evidence On Its ... on 20 May, 2017IN THE COURT OF THE IX ADDL. SMALL CAUSES AND
          ADDL. MACT., BANGALORE, (SCCH-7)

            Dated this, the 20th day of May, 2017.

PRESENT : SMT.INDIRA MAILSWAMY CHETTIYAR,
                             B.Com.,LL.B.(Spl.),L.L.M.,
          IX Addl. Small Causes Judge & XXXIV ACMM,
          Court of Small Causes,
          Member, MACT-7, Bangalore.

                      M.V.C.No.4972/2015

B. Shivabeeraiah,                        ..... PETITIONER
S/o Late Beera Heggade,
Aged about 62 years,
R/at No.17,
2nd Cross, 1st Main Road,
Raghavendra Layout,
IIM - PO, B.G. Road,
Bangalore-560 076.

(By Sri. P. Suresh, Adv.,)

                                   V/s

1. United India Insurance Co., Ltd,      ..... RESPONDENTS
Regional Office (T.P. Hub),
Krushibhavan Building, 6th Floor,
Near Hudson Circle,
Nrupathunga Road,
Bangalore - 560 001.

Policy issued at Mysore.

(Rept. By its In-charge Manager)

(Insurer of the vehicle bearing
Registration No.KA-09-Z-9910,
 SCH-7                            2            M.V.C.No.4972 of 2015



Policy No.0720003114P107954129,
Validity from 29.12.2014 to 28.12.2015)

2. Sri. Venkatesh. J.G.,
S/o. Gopalachar. J.,
Major in age,
Development Officer,
LIC of India,
No.905/4, 4th Main,
Ist Cross, Vidyaranyapuram,
Mysore - 570 008.

(Owner of the Car bearing Registration
No.KA-09-Z-9910)

(R1 - By Sri. Ravish Benni, Adv.,)
(R2 - Exparte)


                              JUDGMENTThe Petitioner has filed the present petition as against the
Respondents No.1 and 2 underSection 166of the Motor Vehicles
Act, 1989, praying to award compensation of Rupees 4,00,000/-
with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of
accident till payment.2.   The brief averments of the Petitioner's case are as
follows;a)   On 03.09.2015 at about 8-00 p.m., his driver was
slowly, cautiously and by observing traffic rules, was stopped
Innova Car bearing Registration No.KA-51-ME-2359 and due to
observation of vehicle bearing Registration No.KA-05-MM-6627,
which was stopped in front of the Innova Car. At that time, all of a
 SCH-7                            3           M.V.C.No.4972 of 2015



sudden, a Fiet Line Car bearing Registration No.KA-09-Z-9910,
driving by its driver came in the same direction, at high speed, in
a rash and negligent manner and dashed to his Innova Car from
back side, then, his Car was dashed to another Car bearing
Registration No.KA-05-MM-667, which was stopped ahead, due to
forcibly dashed by the Fiet Line Car, as a result, his Car
sustained heavy damages of several parts of front and back side
of his Car.b)    Immediately, on the same day, has lodged the
complaint to Mandya Traffic Police, Mandya. The IMV Inspector
has inspected the damages caused to his vehicle and has given
IMV Report. He has taken estimation from Nandi Toyota, Motors
World Pvt. Ltd., Thalaghattapura, Kanakapura Road, Bangalore -
560 062. The said Motors have given estimation for a sum of
Rupees 1,34,596/- plus other admissible expenses and after
carried the repairs, after giving the estimation, Nandi Toyota,
Motors World Pvt. Ltd., people have raised the bill and paid the
same towards repairs charges to Nandi Toyota, Motor World Pvt.
Ltd.,c)    Nandi Toyota Motor World Pvt. Ltd., has take almost a
month for carry out the repairs of his Car. During the said period,
he has spent a sum of Rupees 15,000/- towards conveyance, He
has also spent a sum of Rupees 10,000/- towards other
incidental charges. Due to on account of the said accident, he has
sustained mental shock and agony. The accident has caused
heavy inconvenience to him.SCH-7                            4            M.V.C.No.4972 of 2015d)   The Mandya Traffic Police, Mandya, have registered a
case in Crime No.133/2015, against the driver of the Fiet Line
Car bearing Registration No.KA-09-Z-9910, for the offences underSection 279of IPC. After the investigation, the Police have field
the charge sheet against the driver of the said offending Fiet Line
Car.e)   The same has been insured with the Respondent No.1
and the Insurance Policy is in force as on the date of accident.
Therefore, both the Respondents are jointly and severally liable to
pay the compensation. Hence, this petition.3.   In response to the notice, the Respondent No.1 has
appeared before this Tribunal through its Learned Counsel. But,
initially, inspite of giving sufficient opportunities, the Respondent
No.1 had not filed the written statement. Later, as per the Order
dated 10.05.2016 passed on I.A.No.I, the written statement filed
by the Respondent No.1 is taken on file.4.   Though the notice was duly served on the Respondent
No.2, he was remained absent and hence, he is placed as exparte
on 12.01.2016.5.   The Respondent No.1 inter-alia denying the entire case
of the Petitioner, has further contended as follows;a)   This is damage claim to the Petitioner's vehicle.
Immediately after the accident, it is the duty of the Petitioner, he
has to inform about the accident to the Insurance Company, in
 SCH-7                            5            M.V.C.No.4972 of 2015



which, the Petitioner's vehicle has been insured, i.e., KA-05-MM-
6627, without estimation and without Company's surveyor
Inspection, the Petitioner should not get repair the vehicle. This is
absolutely damage claim remedy is available to the Petitioner in
differing Forum, not before this Hon'ble Court.b)   The petition filed by the Petitioner is false, frivolous
and baseless, as such, the same cannot be sustainable under
facts and circumstances and law.c)   By seeing the sketch on going through the Police
records, like, Panchanama, etc., accident took place due to
negligence of the rider of the Innova Car bearing Registration
No.KA-51-ME-2359, for that, the driver of the said vehicle alone
responsible for the accident.d)   It is not aware whether the Petitioner has lodged any
similar claim with his Insurer regarding damage claim. The
Petitioner not mentioned in this regard in his petition. If the
Petitioner claimed any damage with his Insurer, then, it is not
liable to pay any compensation to the Petitioner. It calls upon the
Petitioner to prove the said facts with strict proof to the
satisfaction of this Hon'ble Tribunal by way of documentary and
oral evidence. There is a general principle person cannot claim
two relief's on the same cause of action, before two differing
Authorities.SCH-7                               6            M.V.C.No.4972 of 2015e)   By it immediately after the accident, the Driver or
Owner has to intimate about the accident to the Insurance
Company in writing. As contemplated underSection 134(c)of
M.V. Act. Intimation particulars are policy number, period of its
validity, date, time and place of accident, name of the injured or
death in the accident and name of the driver and driving licence
particulars. The said particulars has to be intimated to the
Insurance Company by the Police or Investigating Officer concern
or in-charge of the Police Station shall forward copy of the same
within the stipulated time completion of such a report to the
concerned MACT and to the concerned Insurance Company. In
this case, driver, owner and Police not at all intimate to this Office
about the accident. Therefore, on this ground, the said claim
petition is liable to be dismissed with heavy cost.f)   It admits issuance of policy in respect of vehicle
No.KA-09-Z-9910, Policy No.0720003114P107954129 covering
risk w.e.f. 29.12.2014 to 28.12.2015. The liability of it, is subject
to terms and conditions appended to the policy, provisions ofM.V.
Actand verification of valid vehicle documents. Insured in the
said case not intimated to the Respondent's Office about the
accident. Hence, it is not liable to indemnify the insured. The
name and address of the insured as mentioned in the cause title.g)   The amount of Rupees 4,00,000/- claimed by the
Petitioner as a compensation at Column No.21 is highly
exaggerated     and   fictitious,       unwarranted   and     exorbitant,
 SCH-7                             7          M.V.C.No.4972 of 2015



unreasonable and unjustifiable. It is not liable to pay the said
amount to the Petitioner.h)   The Driver of the vehicle bearing Registration No.KA-
09-Z-9910 is not responsible for the accident. Accordingly, it is
not indemnifying the Respondent No.2. Therefore, it is not liable
to pay any compensation to the Petitioner. On this ground itself,
the said claim petition to be dismissed with heavy cost in the
interest of justice and equity.i)   The Petitioner ought not to declare in the petition
whether he claimed damage with his Insurer or not. If he claims,
he ought to have produced the endorsement regarding damages
received. If he has not received the damages with his Insurer, the
Petitioner ought to have produce endorsement in this regards
from his Insurer.j)   The driver of the offending vehicle No.KA-09-Z-9910 is
not responsible for the accident. Accordingly, it is not liable to
indemnifying the Respondent No.2. Therefore, it is not liable to
pay any compensation to the Petitioner. On this ground itself, the
claim petition to be dismissed with heavy cost in the interest of
justice and equity.k)   This petition is bad in law for non-joinder of proper
parties of the petition. The Petitioner ought to have made a party,
i.e., driver of the victim vehicle and also Driver, Owner and
Insurer of the vehicle No.KA-51-ME-2359 and KA-05-MM-6627
 SCH-7                                8           M.V.C.No.4972 of 2015



are necessary parties to this proceedings without these parties,
this petition cannot be disposed of effectively.l)   It reserves the right to file an additional written
statement in case of changed circumstances and new information
is received to it.m)   If      Insured/Owner       place   ex-parte,     in        case
Insured/Owner filed vakalat and written statement and even after
filing vakalat and written statement, if Owner/Insured not cross-
examine the Petitioner effectively, then also, it carves the leave of
this Hon'ble Tribunal to file application underSection 170of the
M.V. Act and to take all the defenses available to insured to
contest the matter on merit.n)   In the event of any award being passed, the rate of
interest awardable by this Hon'ble Tribunal cannot be more than
4% in view of the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka.o)   It calls upon the Petitioner that, he has not filed any
other similar claim petition for the alleged accident before any
other Hon'ble Tribunal at any place. Hence, prayed to dismiss the
claim petition with costs.6.   Based on the above said pleadings, I have framed the
following Issues;SCH-7                             9               M.V.C.No.4972 of 2015



                                ISSUES1. Whether the Petitioner proves that
                  the accident occurred due to rash
                  and negligent riding of the Fiet Line
                  Car bearing Registration No.KA-09-
                  Z-9910 by its driver and in the said
                  accident,   the    Petitioner's   Car
                  sustained damages?2. Whether the Petitioner is entitled for
                  compensation? If so, how much and
                  from whom?3. What Order?7.   In order to prove his case, the Petitioner himself has
been examined as P.W.1 and has also examined on witness as
P.W.2 by filing the affidavits as their examination-in-chief and has
placed reliance upon Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.15. On the other hand, the
Respondent No.1 has not adduced any evidence on its behalf.8.   Heard the arguments.9.   My answers to the above said Issues are as follows;Issue No.1       :   In the Affirmative,

                     Issue No.2       :   Partly in the Affirmative,

                                              The     Petitioner   is
                                          entitled for compensation
                                          of Rupees 1,58,271/- with
                                          interest at the rate of 9%
                                          p.a. from the date of the
 SCH-7                                10              M.V.C.No.4972 of 2015



                                              petition till the date of
                                              payment,      from    the
                                              Respondent No.1.

                        Issue No.3        :   As per the final Order,

for the following;

                                REASONS

        10.   ISSUE NO.1 :-     The P.W.1, who is the Petitioner, hasstated in his examination-in-chief that, on 03.09.2015 at about
8.00 p.m., his Driver was slowly, cautiously and observing traffic
rules, was topped the Innova Car bearing Registration No.KA-51-
MH-ME-2359        and    due   to    observation       of   vehicle   bearing
Registration No.KA-05-MM-6627, which was stopped in front of
his Innova Car and at that time, all of a sudden, a Fiet Line Car
bearing Registration No.KA-09-Z-9910, driving by its driver came
in the same direction at high speed, in a rash and negligent
manner and dashed against his Car from back side, then his Car
was dashed to another Car bearing Registration No.KA-05-MM-
6627, which was stopped ahead and due to forcibly dashed by the
Fiet Line Car, as a result, his Car sustained heavy damages of
several parts of front and back side of his Car as mentioned in
IMV Report and Estimation Report. He has further stated that,
after the accident, immediately, on the same day, he lodged a
complaint to Mandya Traffic Police, Mandya and IMV Inspection
has in respect of the damages caused to his vehicle and has given
IMV Report. He has further stated that, the Mandaya Traffic
Police, Mandya, have registered a case in Crime No.133/2015 as
against the driver of the offending Fiet Line Car bearing
 SCH-7                            11         M.V.C.No.4972 of 2015



Registration No.KA-09-Z-9910 for the offences punishable underSection 279of IPC and after investigation, a charge sheet is filed
as against the driver of Fiet Line Car.11.   No doubt, the Petitioner has not produced the spot
hand sketch to show the scene of the accident. Further, the
Petitioner has not examined the eye witness or independent
witness to consider the accident in question, which is in question
in the present petition. Further, the P.W.1 in his cross-
examination has clearly stated that, he has not informed about
the accident caused to his Fiet Line Car bearing Registration
No.KA-09-Z-9910 and as on the date of accident, his Car is not
having valid Insurance Policy.12.   But, based on the said grounds that, the Petitioner
has to produced the spot hand sketch to show the scene of the
accident and accidental spot, non-examination of the eye witness
or independent witness by the Petitioner to consider the accident
in question, which caused to his vehicle and as on the date of
accident, the Innova Car bearing Registration No.KA-51-ME-2359
was not having a valid Insurance Policy, which was owned by the
Petitioner and the non-information of the accident to the
Insurance Company by the Petitioner relating to his said Innova
Car, it cannot be thrown away to above said oral evidence of
P.W.1, which has been stated by him in his examination-in-chief
and it cannot be said that, there was no negligence on the part of
the driver of the offending Fiet Line Car bearing Registration
No.KA-09-Z-9910, i.e., the Respondent No.2, who was a R.C.
 SCH-7                           12           M.V.C.No.4972 of 2015



Owner-cum-Driver of the said offending Car and the entire
negligence is on the part of the drivers of the Innova Car bearing
Registration No.KA-51-ME-2359 and the Car bearing Registration
No. KA-05-MM-6627, as, to consider his case, the Petitioner has
produced Ex.P.1 FIR, Ex.P.2 Complaint, Ex.P.3 Crime Details
Form along with Spot Mahazar, Ex.P.4 MVI Report, Ex.P.5 Charge
Sheet, Ex.P.11 Notarized Xerox Copy of Driving Licence relating to
Devaraja. B. and Ex.P.12 Certificate of Registration relating to
Vehicle bearing Registration No.KA-51-ME-2359, which clearly
disclosed that, at the time of accident, the driver of Innova Car
bearing Registration No.KA-51-ME-2359 was having a valid and
effective driving licence, to drive such class of Innova Car and the
said Innova Car was owned by the Petitioner and when, it was
stopped behind the Maruti Suzuki Car bearing Registration
No.KA-05-MM-6627 by observing it, at that time, all of a sudden,
the offending Fiet Line Car bearing Registration No.KA-09-Z-9910
was driven by its driver, i.e., the Respondent No.2, with very high
speed, rash and negligent manner from back side of the Innova
Car bearing Registration No.KA-51-ME-2359 and dashed to it on
its back side and due to the said impact, the said Innova Car
dashed to the Maruti Suzuki Car bearing Registration No.KA-05-
MM-6627, which was stopped in front of it and due to the said
impact, the Innova Car bearing Registration No.KA-01-ME-2359,
which was belonging to the Petitioner caused damages on its front
and back side and in this regard, the eye witness of the accident
in question has lodged a complaint before the jurisdictional Police
and after thorough investigation, the Investigating Officer has
filed a charge sheet as against the Respondent No.2, who was a
 SCH-7                               13             M.V.C.No.4972 of 2015



R.C. Owner-cum-Driver of the offending Fiet Line Car bearing
Registration No.KA-09-Z-9910 for the offences punishable underSection 279of IPC by alleging that, due to his own negligence
itself, the damages caused to the Petitioner's Car bearing
Registration No.KA-51-ME-2359, which is clear from the following
discussion. Further, the P.W.1 in his cross-examination has
clearly stated that, the driver of the Fiet Car has lodged a
complaint as against the said Car. If really, there was no
negligence on the part of the Respondent No.2, who was a R.C.
Owner-cum-Driver        of   the   offending   Fiet    Line   Car   bearing
Registration No.KA-09-Z-9910 in the commission of the said road
traffic accident, he could have definitely lodged a complaint
immediately after the accident as against the drivers of Innova
Car bearing Registration No.KA-51-ME-2359 and Maruthi Suzuki
Swift    D'zire   Car   bearing     Registration      No.KA-05-MM-6627.
Further, it is clearly mentioned in Ex.P.4 MVI Report that, rear
dicky door, bumper, front bonnet and bumper of Innova Car
bearing Registration No.KA-51-ME-2359 caused damages in the
said road traffic accident. From this, it is crystal clear that, in the
said road traffic accident, the front and back portion of Innova
Car     bearing   Registration      No.KA-51-ME-2359,         which        was
belonging to the Petitioner, caused damages. Further, the
Respondent No.2 has not appeared before this Tribunal inspite of
service of the notice and as such, he is placed as exparte, which
clearly implies that, he has indirectly admitted the entire case
made out by the Petitioner as against him in the present petition
as well as the evidence adduced by him to consider his case.
Further, though the Respondent No.1 by filing the written
 SCH-7                            14          M.V.C.No.4972 of 2015



statement has seriously contested the case of the Petitioners by
filing the written statement, it has not adduced any evidence on
its behalf to consider its defence.13.   The contents of Ex.P.1 FIR and Ex.P.2 Complaint
disclosed that, the eye witness i.e., the R.C. Owner-cum-Driver of
the Car bearing Registration No.KA-05-MM-6627 has lodged
Ex.P.2 Complaint before the Mandya Traffic Police as against the
driver of the offending Fiet Line Car bearing Registration No.KA-
09-Z-9910 by alleging that, due to high speed, rash and negligent
manner of driving of the offending Fiet Line Car bearing
Registration No.KA-09-Z-9910 by its driver, the said road traffic
accident was taken place on 03.09.2015 at 8.00 p.m., which
dashed to the back portion of Innova Car bearing Registration
No.KA-51-ME-2359, which was stopped on the back side of his
Car bearing Registration No.KA-05-MM-6627, when he was
stopped his Car on the accidental spot and due to the said
impact, the front and back portion of the Innova Car bearing
Registration No.KA-51-ME-2359 caused damages and hence, he
prayed to take necessary legal action as against the driver of the
offending Fiet Line Car bearing Registration No.KA-09-Z-9910 and
based on Ex.P.2 Complaint, the said Police have registered a
criminal case as against the driver of Fiet Car for the offences
punishable underSection 279of IPC under Crime No.133/2015.
It is also clear from the contents of Ex.P.1 FIR and Ex.P.2
Complaint that, there is no delay as such in lodging Ex.P.2
Complaint in respect of the said accident.SCH-7                            15           M.V.C.No.4972 of 201514.   The contents of Ex.P.3 Crime Details Form along with
Spot Mahazar and Ex.P.4 MVI Report disclosed that, when the
Innova Car bearing Registration No.KA-51-ME-2359 owned by the
Petitioner was stopped behind the Maruti Suzuki Swift D'zire Car
bearing Registration No.KA-05-MM-6627, which was already
stopped and at that time, the driver of the offending Fiet Line Car
bearing Registration No.KA-09-Z-9910 came with very high speed,
in a rash and negligent manner on the same direction and dashed
to the Innova Car bearing Registration No.Ka-51-ME-2359 on its
behind and due to the said impact, the said Innova Car dashed
to Maruti Suzuki Car on its back side and due to the said impact,
both front and back portions of the Innova Car bearing
Registration No.KA-05-ME-2359 caused damages and the entire
negligence is on the part of the driver of the offending Fiet Line
Car bearing Registration No.KA-09-Z-9910 and there was no
negligence on the part of the driver of Innova Car bearing
Registration No.KA-51-ME-2359 and the offending Fiet Line Car
bearing Registration No.KA-09-Z-9910 as well as its driver, i.e.,
the Respondent No.2, who was a R.C. Owner-cum-Driver of the
offending Car, are very much involved in the said road traffic
accident. The damages caused to the said three Cars are clearly
shown in Ex.P.4 MVI Report, which clearly disclosed about the
terrific impact of the said road traffic accident. It is also clearly
mentioned in Ex.P.4 MVI Report that, the said accident was not
occurred due to any mechanical defects of the said Cars.15.   The contents of Ex.P.5 Charge Sheet disclosed that,
since during the course of investigation, it is found that, due to
 SCH-7                            16          M.V.C.No.4972 of 2015



very high speed, rash and negligent manner of driving of the
offending Fiet Line Car bearing Registration No.KA-09-Z-9910 by
its driver itself, i.e., the R.C. Owner-cum-Driver of the offending
Car, the said road traffic accident was taken place on 03.09.2015
at about 8.00 p.m. on Bangalore - Mysore High Way, which came
from Bangalore towards Mysore and dashed to the back portion of
the Innova Car bearing Registration No.KA-51-ME-2359 and due
to the said impact, the said Car bearing Registration No.KA-05-
ME-2359 dashed to the back portion of another Car bearing
Registration No.KA-05-MM-6627 on its behind and due to the
said impact, all three Cars caused damages and as such, after
thorough investigation, the Investigating Officer has filed a Charge
Sheet as against the Respondent No.2, who was a R.C. Owner-
cum-Driver of the offending Fiet Line Car bearing Registration
No.KA-09-Z-9910 for the offence punishable underSection 279of
IPC. There is no allegation leveled by the Investigating Officer in
Ex.P.5 Charge Sheet as against the drivers of Innova Car bearing
Registration No.KA-51-ME-2359 and Maruti Suzuki Swift D'zire
Car     bearing   Registration   No.KA-05-MM-6627      about     their
negligence in the commission of the said road traffic accident.16.   From the above said material evidence, both oral and
documentary, it is clearly proved that, the entire negligence is on
the part of the Respondent No.2, who was a R.C. Owner-cum-
Driver of the offending Fiet Line Car bearing Registration No.KA-
09-Z-9910 in the commission of the said road traffic accident and
there was no negligence on the part of the drivers of Innova Car
bearing Registration No.KA-51-ME-2359 and Maruti Suzuki Swift
 SCH-7                              17           M.V.C.No.4972 of 2015



D'zire    Car    bearing   Registration   No.KA-05-MM-6627       in     the
commission of the said road traffic accident and in the said
accident, the Innova Car bearing Registration No.KA-51-ME-2359,
which was belonging to the Petitioner caused damages on its front
and back portion. Accordingly, I answered Issue No.1 in the
Affirmative.17.   ISSUE NO.2 :-    The Petitioner has stated that, he has
taken estimation from Nandhi Toyoto Motors World Pvt. Ltd.,
Thalaghattapura, Kanakapura Road, Bangalore and the said
Motors have given estimation for a sum of Rupees 1,34,596/-
plus other admissible expenses and after carried out the repairs
and after giving the estimation, Toyota Motors World Pvt. Ltd.,
people have raised the bill and paid the same towards repairs
charges to Toyota Motors World Pvt. Ltd.18.   The Petitioner has produced Ex.P.6 Estimation, Ex.P.7
Tax Invoice and Ex.P.8 Receipts 2 in numbers.19.   The Petitioner has also produced Ex.P.12 Certificate of
Registration relating to his vehicle bearing Registration No.KA-51-
ME-2359, which clearly disclosed that, as on the date of accident,
he was a R.C. Owner of the said Innova Car bearing Registration
No.KA-51-ME- 2359.20.   EX.P.6 Estimation issued by the Toyoto Motor World
Pvt. Ltd., disclosed that, it has given to the Petitioner in respect of
estimation for the cost of repairs of the Innova Car bearing
 SCH-7                             18          M.V.C.No.4972 of 2015



Registration No.KA-51-ME 2359 by mentioning that, the total cost
of repair is of Rupees 2,06,804/-, which includes labour charges
of Rupees 77,189/- and spare parts is of Rupees 1,29,615/-.21.   Ex.P.7 Tax Invoice disclosed that, it is issued by the
said Toyoto Motor World Pvt. Ltd., in favour of the Petitioner in
respect of the costs of repairs of his Innova Car bearing
Registration No.KA-51-ME-2359 in favour of the Petitioner in
respect of costs of repairs of his Innova Car bearing Registration
No.KA-51-ME-2359 by mentioning the total charges of Rupees
1,34,596/-, which includes labour charges of Rupees 70,486-20
and spare parts charges of Rupees 64,109-78, which was
delivered the Car to the Petitioner on 22.09.2015 after its repair,
which was entrusted by the Petitioner to the said Toyota Motor
World Pvt., Ltd. on 22.09.2015.22.   The contents of Ex.P.8 Receipts 2 in numbers,
disclosed that, in respect of repair of his Innova Car bearing
Registration No.kA-51-ME-2359 to the damages caused in the
said road traffic accident, the Petitioner was paid Rupees
13,675/- and Rupees 1,34,596/- to Nandi Toyota Pvt., Ltd., i.e.,
totally Rupees 1,48,271/-.23.   From the said material evidence, which is adduced by
the Petitioner, it is clearly proved that, for the damages caused to
his Innova Car bearing Registration No.KA-51-ME-2359 in the
accident in question, the Petitioner got repaired it at Nandi Toyota
Motor World Pvt. Ltd., by spending a sum of Rupees 1,48,271/-SCH-7                              19           M.V.C.No.4972 of 2015



and the said Innova Car bearing Registration No.KA-51-ME-2359
was not in the custody and possession of the Petitioner from
03.09.2015 to 22.09.2015, i.e., for 20 days, which includes the
date of accident, i.e., from 03.09.2015 to 22.09.2015.24.     Further, the Petitioner has examined the Insurance
Surveyor-cum-Loss Assessor as P.W.2, who has produced Ex.P.13
Motor Survey Report dated 19.10.2016 and Ex.P.14 Re-Inspection
Report dated 19.10.2016, which clearly disclosed that, the said
Innova        Car   bearing   Registration   No.KA-51-ME-2359           was
belonging to the Petitioner, which was 2013 Model and it caused
damages in the said road traffic accident and the estimation of
the damages is of Rupees 2,06,804/-, which includes the costs of
the spare parts, labour charges and other charges. The P.W.2 has
further clearly stated in his cross-examination that, the Owner of
the Innova Car bearing Registration No.KA-51-ME-2359 has
directly approached him to survey the damages caused to it and
the said vehicle is a model of 2013. He has clearly denied the
suggestions put to him by the Respondent No.1 during the course
of cross-examination that, after deduction of depreciation, the
said vehicle not costs of the amount shown in his report and he
has shown on higher side only to help the Petitioner. On perusal
of the damages caused to the Innova Car bearing Registration
No.KA-51-ME-2359 as shown in Ex.P.4 MVI Report, the contents
of Ex.P.6 Estimation, the Ex.P.13 Motor Survey Report dated
19.10.2016, Ex.P.14 Re-Inspection Report dated 19.10.2016,
Ex.P.7 Tax Invoice and Ex.P.8 Receipts, it is made crystal clear
that, for repair of the damages caused to the said Innova Car
 SCH-7                            20            M.V.C.No.4972 of 2015



bearing Registration No.KA-51-ME-2359, a sum of Rupees
1,48,271/- was required as shown in Ex.P.8 Receipts. Further
while answering Issue No.1, this Tribunal has already come to the
conclusion that, the entire negligence is on the part of the
Respondent No.2, who was a R.C. Owner-cum-Driver of the
offending Fiet Line Car bearing Registration No.KA-09-Z-9910 in
the commission of the said road traffic accident and there was no
negligence on the part of the drivers of Innova Car bearing
Registration No.KA-51-ME-2359 and Maruti Suzuki Swift D'zire
Car bearing Registration No.KA-05-MM-6627 in the commission
of the said road traffic accident and in the said accident, the
Innova Car bearing Registration No.KA-51-ME-2359, which was
belonging to the Petitioner caused damages on its front and back
portion. Hence, the Petitioner is entitled for a sum of Rupees
1,48,271/- towards damages caused to his Innova Car bearing
Registration No.KA-51-ME-2359.25.   No doubt, except his oral version, the Petitioner has
not produced any authenticated documents to show that, during
the period of repair of his Car, he has spent a sum of Rupees
15,000/- towards conveyance and Rupees 10,000/- towards other
incidental charges. However, it is very much clear from the above
referred documents that, from the date of accident till its repair,
the Innova Car bearing Registration No.KA-51-ME-2359 was not
available with the Petitioner, i.e., from the date of accident till its
repair by the service centre i.e., from 03.09.2015 to 22.09.2015,
i.e., for 20 days. Therefore, the Petitioner is entitled for
compensation towards conveyance and other incidental charges.SCH-7                             21            M.V.C.No.4972 of 2015



By considering the same, this Tribunal feels that, it is just, proper
and necessary to award a sum of Rupees 5,000/- towards
conveyance and Rupees 5,000/- towards incidental charges,
which is reasonable and acceptable one.26.   In all, the Petitioner is entitled for total compensation
of Rupees 1,58,271/- (Rupees 1,48,271/- + Rupees 5,000 +
Rupees 5,000/-) along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum
on the above said sum from the date of petition till payment.27.   The P.W.1 has stated that, the offending Fiet Line Car
bearing Registration No.KA-09-Z-9910 has been insured with the
Respondent No.1 and the Insurance Policy is in force as on the
date of accident and therefore, both the Respondents are jointly
and severally liable to pay the compensation.28.   While answering Issue No.1, this Tribunal has already
come to the conclusion that, the entire negligence is on the part of
the Respondent No.2, who was a R.C. Owner-cum-Driver of the
offending Fiet Line Car bearing Registration No.KA-09-Z-9910 in
the commission of the said road traffic accident and there was no
negligence on the part of the drivers of Innova Car bearing
Registration No.KA-51-ME-2359 and Maruti Suzuki Swift D'zire
Car bearing Registration No.KA-05-MM-6627 in the commission
of the said road traffic accident and in the said accident, the
Innova Car bearing Registration No.KA-51-ME-2359, which was
belonging to the Petitioner caused damages on its front and back
portion.SCH-7                            22           M.V.C.No.4972 of 201529.   The Petitioner in the cause title of the petition has
clearly mentioned that, the Respondent No.1 is the Insurer and
the Respondent No.2 is the Owner of the offending Fiet Line Car
bearing Registration No.KA-09-Z-9910 and its Insurance Policy
No.0720003114P107954129,          validity   from   29.12.2014        to
28.12.2015. The Respondent No.1 in its written statement has
admitted the issuance of policy in respect of the vehicle bearing
Registration                 No.KA-09-Z-9910,                    Policy
No.0720003114P107954129, covering the risk with effect from
29.12.2014 to 28.12.2015 and the liability of it is subject to the
terms and conditions appended to the policy, the provisions ofM.V. Actand verification of valid vehicle documents. From this
material evidence, which is very much available on record, it is
clearly proved that, at the time of accident, the Respondent No.1
was an Insurer and the Respondent No.2 was a R.C. Owner-cum-
Driver of the offending Fiet Line Car bearing Registration No.KA-
09-Z-9910 and its Insurance Policy was valid, which covers the
date of accident. There is no allegation leveled by the Investigating
Officer in Ex.P.5 Charge Sheet as against the Respondent No.2,
who was a R.C. Owner-cum-Driver of the offending Fiet Line Car
bearing Registration No.KA-09-Z-9910 that, at the time of
accident, he was not having a valid and effective driving license to
drive such class of offending Car. The violation of the terms and
conditions of the admitted Insurance Policy by the Respondent
No.2 is not proved by the Respondent No.1. Under such
circumstances, the Respondent No.1 being an Insurer and the
Respondent No.2 being a R.C. Owner-cum-Driver of the offending
Fiet Line Car bearing Registration No.KA-09-Z-9910, are jointly
 SCH-7                                23              M.V.C.No.4972 of 2015



and severally liable to pay the above said compensation and
interest to the Petitioner. Since, the Respondent No.1 is an
Insurer, it shall indemnify the Respondent No.2. Hence, Issue
No.2 is answered accordingly.30.   ISSUE NO.3 :- For the aforesaid reasons, I proceed to
pass the following,
                                 ORDER

                    The petition filed by the Petitioner
               underSection    166of    the   Motor
               Vehicles Act, 1989, is hereby partly
               allowed with costs.The     Petitioner     is    entitled   for
               compensation of Rupees 1,58,271/-with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from
               the date of the petition till the date of
               payment, from the Respondent No.1.The Respondent No.1 shall deposit
               the said compensation and interest in
               this Tribunal, within two months from
               the date of this Order.In    the   event      of     deposit    of
               compensation         and    interest,    entire
               amount shall be released in the name
 SCH-7                          24           M.V.C.No.4972 of 2015



             of the Petitioner through account payee
             cheque, on proper identification.Advocate's fee is fixed at Rupees
             1,000/-.Draw award accordingly.(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed and typed by her,
corrected and then, pronounced by me in the open Court, on this,
the 20th day of May, 2017.)


                     (INDIRA MAILSWAMY CHETTIYAR)
                 IX Addl. Small Causes Judge & XXXIV ACMM,
                            Court of Small Causes,
                          Member, MACT-7, Bangalore.ANNEXURE1. WITNESSES EXAMINED BY THE PETITIONER :-P.W.1        :   B. Shivabeeraiah
        P.W.2        :   Hemanth Kumar

2. DOCUMENTS MARKED BY THE PETITIONER :-

        Ex.P.1       :   True copy of FIR
        Ex.P.2       :   True copy of Complaint
        Ex.P.3       :   True copy of Crime Details Form
                         along with Spot Mahazar
        Ex.P.4       :   True copy of MVI Report
        Ex.P.5       :   True copy of Charge Sheet
        Ex.P.6       :   True copy of Estimation
        Ex.P.7       :   Tax Invoice
        Ex.P.8       :   Receipts (2 in nos.)
 SCH-7                              25       M.V.C.No.4972 of 2015



        Ex.P.9       :   Motor Survey Report dated 19.10.2016
                         along with Photographs
        Ex.P.10      :   Respondent-Inspection Report dated
                         19.10.2016 along with Photographs
        Ex.P.11      :   Notarized Xerox Copy of D.L. relating to
                         Devaraja. B.
        Ex.P.12      :   Notarized xerox copy of Certificate of
                         Registration relating to Vehicle bearing
                         Registration No.KA-51-ME-2359
        Ex.P.13      :   Motor Survey Report dated 19.10.2016
        Ex.P.14      :   Re-inspection Report dated 19.10.2016
        Ex.P.15      :   Notarized xerox copy of Identity Card
                         relating to Hemantha Kumar3. WITNESSES EXAMINED BY THE RESPONDENTS :-- Nil -4. DOCUMENTS MARKED BY THE RESPONDENTS :-- Nil -(INDIRA MAILSWAMY CHETTIYAR)
                  IX Addl. Small Causes Judge & XXXIV ACMM,
                            Court of Small Causes,
                          Member, MACT-7, Bangalore.