AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
S.N. Satyanakayana
The parents and younger sister of deceased S.V. Ganesh @ Narayanaswamy have come up in this appeal challenging the Judgment and Award dated 22.02.2008 passed in MVC No. 1071/2002. The aforesaid appeal is filed seeking enhancement of compensation awarded to the claimants and also for modification of the said Judgment of the Tribunal, wherein the liability to pay the compensation is saddled only on the owners of the vehicles bearing Nos. KA-01/2056 and KA-07/2285 which are involved in the accident resulting in the death of S.V. Ganesh.
Heard the counsel for appellants and respondent No. 1. Perused the judgment, impugned. On going through the said finding therein, it is seen that the accident has taken place between the aforesaid two vehicles, one of which, i.e., lorry bearing No. KA-01/2056, which was carrying tomato in which deceased was travelling. If is contended that the deceased was travelling in the said lorry along with the goods loaded into the said lorry and it is also contended that the said accident is due to rash and negligent driving of both the vehicles, i.e., lorry bearing No.KA-01/2056 and another lorry bearing KA-07/2285, which came from opposite direction and caused the accident.
On appreciation of oral and documentary evidence available on record, the Tribunal has observed that though the claimants pleaded that the deceased S.V. Ganesh travelled in the said vehicle along with the goods, there is nothing on record to show that he was the owner of the said goods. Further there is no evidence regarding his employment and income. In the absence of the same, the Tribunal has taken his notional income at Rs. 15,000/- per annum and accordingly calculated the compensation payable to him deducting 50% towards his personal expenses for the reason that he was bachelor and awarded the compensation fastening the liability to pay the same on the owners of both the vehicles.
Though there are two lorries involved in the accident the lorry bearing No. KA 01/2056 is insured with 1st respondent. The said lorry is covered under act policy which cover the liability of one driver and one cleaner. So far as another lorry bearing No. KA-07/2285 also involved in the said accident and the same not having insurance coverage at the relevant time of the accident, the Tribunal has saddled the liability to pay compensation on the owners of both lorry in equal proportion, since the Tribunal has come to the conclusion that the drivers of both lorries are equally responsible for the said accident.
On going through the judgment impugned, it is seen that neither there is illegality nor infirmity in the said judgment, which calls for interference in this Court. Even otherwise, on going through the grounds of appeal, it is seen that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal fastening the liability or both the owners appears to be just and proper and therefore the appeal does not call for admission. Accordingly the same is dismissed.