AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
H. Billappa, J.—Notice to the 1st respondent is dispensed with.
This appeal is directed against the judgment and award, dated 17.10.2006, passed by the MACT, Tumkur, in MVC No. 790/1999.
By the impugned judgment and award, the Tribunal has granted compensation of Rs. 2,25,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. front the date of petition till the date of realisation.
Aggrieved by that, the appellant Insurance Company has filed this appeal, questioning the quantum.
In brief, the fuels are that on 22.8.1099, at about 7.30 p.m., the deceased Manu was standing on the footpath, on NH.4, along with his cycle near bus stand. At that time, the lorry bearing No. MWK 152 came at hig speed and dashed against the deceased Manu and also the cycle. As a result of that, the deceased Manu sustained injuries and succumbed of the same. The first respondent, who is the mother of the deceased claimed compensation of Rs. 3 Lakhs. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 2,25,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization. Aggrieved by that, the appellant-Insurance Company has filed this appeal, questioning the quantum.
The learned Counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company contended that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is highly excessive and baseless and therefore, cannot be sustained in law.
I do not find any merit in the contention of the learned Counsel for the appellant. The deceased Manu was aged 12 years at the time of accident. The Tribunal following the decision of this Court reported in North West Karnataka Road Transport Corporation Vs. Rafiq Moulasab Bagawan and Another, and also of the Hon''ble Supreme Court reported in 2005 ACJ 99 has awarded a sum of Rs. 2,25,000/- as compensation. This Court in S. Sana Ulla and Another Vs. A.R. Shivashankar and Others, has awarded a sum of Rs. 2,25,000/ for a boy aged about 13 years. Therefore, in my considered view, there is no merit in tin contention that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is highly excessive and baseless and accordingly it is rejected. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper and therefore, it docs not call for interference. There is no merit in this appeal and hence, it is liable lo be dismissed.
Accordingly, it is dismissed.
The amount in deposit before this Court shall be transmitted to the Tribunal for disbursement.