High CourtsSingle Bench(2012) 01 KAR CK 0180

Sri. M. Raju vs V. Shashikumar and The Manager Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.

Karnataka High Court · Decided on 3 January 2012

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ravi Malimath, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
M.F.A. No. 4114 of 2009 (MVC)

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 334 words

Ravi Malimath

1.

Being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 19.12.2006 passed in M.V.C. No. 5349/2007 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore dismissing the claim petition, the claimant has filed this present appeal.

2.

The claim is towards the damages sustained to his Tata Victa No. KA 42-1578 in an accident that occurred on 03.07.2007 near the Rajajinagar 1st Block Signal. A Tata Indica bearing No. KA 04 B 3779 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the appellant''s vehicle. In this regard, he got his vehicle repaired and incurred expenses of Rs. 2,94,654/- including labour charges. During the said period, so he lost his earnings. Hence, he prayed for compensation for a sum of Rs. 5,49,654/-. The same was contested and by the impugned order, the claim petition was dismissed. Hence, the present appeal.

3.

The learned counsel for the appellant contends that in all, the appellant has spent a sum of Rs. 2,94,654/-towards the repairs to his vehicle. The respondent No. 2 insurance company has paid a sum of Rs. 1,78,972/-Therefore, ha pleads that the balance amount be recovered from the insurance company

4.

On a specific question being asked, the counsel for the appellant is unable to reveal the actual damages sustained and whether the evidence is sufficient to show that he has incurred an expense of Rs. 2,94,654/-, None of the exhibits would disclose that the appellant had spent the said amount-. Under these circumstances, none of the contentions of the appellant requires any consideration. Except in the evidence of the appellant where he has narrated figures, there is no other material produce by the appellant to substantiate the same. The learned counsel for the appellant pleads inability to satisfy this Court He very fairly contends that none of these figures have been marked by him in the evidence. Under these circumstances, I do not find any error committed by the Tribunal in dismissing his petition. The appeal is devoid of merit and is dismissed.