[ad_1]
Bangalore District Court
Zakir Khan Alias Zakeer Ahmed Khan vs Dasa S Sreedhar on 21 July, 2025
SCCH-2 1 M.V.C.No.4654/2023
KABC020206622023
IN THE COURT OF THE VI ADDL. JUDGE, COURT OF
SMALL CAUSES AND ADDL. CHIEF JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE AND MACT, BENGALURU. (SCCH-2).
M.V.C. No. 4654/2023
: Present :
Sri. H.P. Mohan Kumar, B.Sc.,LL.B.,
VIth Addl. Judge, Court of Small
Causes and ACJM and MACT,
Bengaluru.
Dated on this 21st day of July, 2025.
Petitioner Sri Zakir Khan @ Zakeer Ahmed
: Khan
S/o Mahaboob Pasha,
Aged about 39 years,
R/at: No.10, 5th cross,
Muslim colony, Byrasandra,
Bangalore 560011.
(By Sri Shivakumar R , Advocate)
-VERSUS-
Respondents 1 Dasa S Sreedhar
S/o Suryaprakash,
SCCH-2 2 MVC.No.4654/2023
R/at: No.57, 3rd main, 3rd cross,
Gururaghavendra Nagar,
B H E K Retail, J P Nagar,
7th phase, Bengaluru 560078.
(R.C. Owner of Mahindra Car bearing
Reg.No.KA.05.MY.2077)
(By Sri. R S Srikanta Reddy, Advocate)
2. The Manager
Zuno General Insurance Co. Ltd.,
Kamala Arcade, 1st floor,
New No.71, Old No.88/A,
26th main, 37th B cross road,
Jayanagar, 9th block,
Bengaluru 560069.
(Policy No.520216760
Valid from 16.10.2022 to 15.10.2023)
(By Sri. Raghavendra Bhat , Advocate)
3. Mrs. M Sumitha Sharma
D/W/o Dwarakanath Sharma,
R/at: No.26, 1st C cross, near ISRO
layout, Vittal nagar, Bikasipura,
Bengaluru 560078.
(Insurer Policy Holder)
(By Sri. H K Shivaraju, Advocate)
SCCH-2 3 MVC.No.4654/2023
:J U D G M E N T:
This is a claim petition U/Sec.166 of MV Act claiming
compensation of Rs.15,00,000/- with interest for the
injuries suffered in the Motor Vehicle Accident occurred on
08.04.2023.
2. The averments of the petition in brief is as
follows:
On 08.04.2023, at about 1.35 p.m., the petitioner
was standing at his shop for selling cloths on Kadapa –
Bengaluru road, Chinnasandra village, at that time the
driver of Mahendra XUV Car bearing No. KA.05.MY.2077
came from Bangalore side at high speed, in a rash and
negligent manner and dashed to one Syed Basheer Ahmed
@ Basheer Ahmed and inturn dashed to the petitioner and
also to the persons who are in shop and standing in front
of the shops and caused the accident. Due to the impact,
petitioner sustained grievous injuries.
SCCH-2 4 MVC.No.4654/2023
Immediately, the petitioner was shifted to Chintamani
Government Hospital, after first aid, later he was shifted to
Sri Gaurav Orthopaedic and Surgical hospital, Kolar,
wherein petitioner took treatment as an inpatient. The
petitioner has spent Rs.5,00,000/- towards medicine,
conveyance and nourishment etc.,
Prior to the accident, the petitioner was doing cloth
selling business and he was earning Rs.30,000/- per
month. Due to injuries sustained in the accident, the
petitioner is not able to continue with his work and has
suffered great hardship and mental agony.
The Chintamani Rural Police have registered the case
in Crime No.126/2023 for the offence punishable U/Sec
279, 337 and 304(a) of IPC against the driver of the
Mahendra XUV Car bearing No. KA.05.MY.2077 for
causing the accident.
The 1st respondent is the RC owner and 2nd
respondent is the insurer and respondent No.3 is the
SCCH-2 5 MVC.No.4654/2023policy holder of the said Car. Hence they are jointly and
severally liable to pay compensation to the petitioner. With
these averments petitioner prayed to award
compensation.
3. In response to the notice issued by the Tribunal,
the 1st and 2nd respondents have appeared through their
counsel and filed separate written statements. However 3 rd
respondent has not appeared, hence placed as Exparte.
4. The written statement averments of 1st
respondent are as hereunder:
This respondent has submitted that the Mahindra
XUV Car bearing Reg.No. KA.05.MY.2077 has been insured
with the 2nd respondent insurance company vide policy No.
520216760 and was in force as on the date of accident.
Further this respondent has denied the cause and manner
of accident and also the involvement of the XUV Car
bearing Reg.No. KA.05.MY.2077 in the alleged accident.
Further denied the age, occupation and income of the
SCCH-2 6 MVC.No.4654/2023petitioner. The compensation claimed by the petitioner is
highly exaggerated, exorbitant and without any basis. With
these grounds, the 1st respondent prayed to dismiss
the petition.
5. The written statement averments of 2nd
respondent is as hereunder:
Respondent No.2 has admitted the issuance of
insurance policy with respect to XUV Car bearing Reg.No.
KA.05.MY.2077 and the liability of this respondent if any is
subject to the terms and conditions of the policy. Inter-alia
contended that, the driver of the Car was not having valid
driving license as on the date of accident. Further
contended that, there is violation of mandatory provision of
Sec.134 (c), 158(6) of M.V. Act by the R.C. owner and
concerned police. It has denied the age, avocation and
income of the petitioner. The compensation claimed by the
petitioner is excessive, exorbitant and exaggerated. With
these grounds, the 2nd respondent prayed to dismiss
SCCH-2 7 MVC.No.4654/2023the petition.
6. On the basis of the above pleadings, the
predecessor in the office has framed the following:
: I S S U E S:
1. Whether the petitioner proves that on
08.04.2023 at about 1.35 p.m., when he
was standing in his shop near Jam Jam
Hotel, at Chinnasandra Village, Cadapa-
Bengaluru road, Chintamani Taluk,
Chikkaballapur District, he has sustained
grievous injuries in the accident due to
rash or negligent driving of Mahindra XUV
Car bearing Reg.No.KA-05-MY-2077 by its
driver as stated in the petition ?
2. Whether the petitioner proves that he is
entitled for the compensation? If so, to
what extent and from whom ?
3. What order or award?
7. In order to prove his case, petitioner himself got
examined as P.W.1 and Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.15 were got marked.
SCCH-2 8 MVC.No.4654/2023
Thereafter, P.W.1 was cross-examined from the side of
respondent No.2. In spite of sufficient opportunity,
respondents have not lead any evidence.
8. Heard the arguments from both side. Perused
records placed before the court.
9. The findings of this Tribunal to the above referred
Issues are as under:-
Issue No.1 :- In the Affirmative.
Issue No.2 :- In the Partly Affirmative.
Issue No.3 :- As per final order,
for the following.
:REASONS:
10. ISSUE No.1:- Before going to discuss the issue
no.1, it is worth to refer the decision reported in (2009) 13
SCC 530 between Bimla Devi and others v. Himachal
Road Transport Corporation and others, wherein the
Hon’ble Apex Court has observed that, “it is necessary to
be borne in mind that strict proof of an accident
SCCH-2 9 MVC.No.4654/2023
caused by a particular bus in a particular manner may
not be possible to be done by the claimants. The
claimants are merely required to establish their case
on the touchstone of preponderance of probability. The
standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt could not
have been applied”. Therefore it is crystal clear that the
petitioner has to prove his case on the principle of
preponderance of probabilities.
11. In order to prove his case, the petitioner
examined himself as P.W.1 by way of filing affidavit in
support of his oral examination-in-chief. Hence, this
Tribunal need not to recapitulate the same once again at
this juncture. To prove issue No.1, P.W.1 has relied on
Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.10. Accordingly, Ex.P.1 is the true copy of
Complaint. Ex.P.2 is the true copy of FIR. Ex.P.3 is the
true copy of spot mahazar. Ex.P.4 is the true copy of spot
sketch. Ex.P.5 is the true copy of seizer mahazar. Ex.P.6
& Ex.P7 are the true copies of notice and reply to the
SCCH-2 10 MVC.No.4654/2023
notice U/Sec.133. Ex.P.8 is the true copy of IMV report.
Ex.P9 is the true copy of wound certificate and Ex.P.10 is
the true copy of charge sheet.
12. According to the petitioner, he has sustained
injuries in the road accident. According to the respondent
the Mahindra XUV Car bearing Reg.No. KA.05.MY.2077 is
not involved in the alleged accident.
13. Further, to prove the alleged negligence on the
part of petitioner, the Insurance Company has cross-
examined the petitioner/P.W.1 in detail. Nothing has been
elicited from mouth of P.W.1 to establish that the accident
was took place only on the negligence of petitioner. At the
cost of repetition, to substantiate its contention, Insurance
company has not placed positive evidence.
14. In the instant case, the petitioner has produced
police documents. As per Ex.P.1, complaint was lodged
before Chintamani Police Station. Thereafter, as per
Ex.P.2, FIR was lodged against the driver of the Mahindra
SCCH-2 11 MVC.No.4654/2023
XUV Car bearing Reg.No. KA.05.MY.2077. On careful
perusal of Ex.P.1, Ex.P.2 and Ex.P.10, it appears to this
Tribunal that, on the basis of complaint, the police have
registered the case against the driver of the offending
vehicle and Investigating officer has submitted Charge
sheet as per Ex.P.10 after completing investigation. A
careful perusal of Ex.P.9 wound certificate, it clearly goes
to show that, the injuries sustained by the petitioner in a
road traffic accident. Further, on perusal of Ex.P.10 i.e.,
charge sheet, it reveals that, the driver of offending vehicle
i.e., Mahindra XUV Car bearing Reg.No. KA.05.MY.2077
has been arrayed as an accused. Now, it is worth to rely
on the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka
reported in ILR 2003 Karnataka page 493, between
Mallamma Vs. Balaji and Others, wherein the Hon’ble
High Court of Karnataka held at para 12 as hereunder:
” Filing of the charge sheet against
the driver is also a prima-facie case to
hold that, the driver of the said lorry
SCCH-2 12 MVC.No.4654/2023was responsible for the accident and
burden shifts on him to prove the
same”.
Hence, the decision referred to above is aptly applicable to
the case on hand.
15. At the cost of repetition, the contents of
complaint and charge sheet clearly reveal that, when the
petitioner was standing in his cloth shop, the driver of
Mahindra XUV Car bearing Reg.No. KA.05.MY.2077 came
in a rash or negligent manner with high and dashed
against the petitioner and other peoples. The evidence
placed on record clearly reveals that the driver of Mahindra
XUV Car bearing Reg.No. KA.05.MY.2077 has caused the
accident and the evidence of PW.1 is believable with
respect to accident caused only on the rash or negligence
of the driver of Car. Accordingly, Issue No.1 is answered
in the Affirmative.
SCCH-2 13 MVC.No.4654/2023
16. ISSUE No.2:- Already this Tribunal has
observed that, the accident was caused due to the rash or
negligent driving of the Mahindra XUV Car bearing Reg.No.
KA.05.MY.2077. It is needless to mention that, 1 st
respondent is the owner of the offending vehicle. The 2 nd
respondent is the Insurer of the offending vehicle and 3rd
respondent is the policy holder of the offending vehicle.
Therefore, the petitioner is entitled for compensation.
17. Loss of Future Income due to disability:-
In the instant case, the petitioner has averred that,
he has sustained grievous injuries in the alleged accident.
He has produced wound certificate and discharge
summary, which were marked as Ex.P.9 and Ex.P.11. On
perusal of these documents, it reveal that, the petitioner
has sustained right shoulder – fracture lateral end clavicle.
It is relevant to note that, the petitioner has not examined
the doctor to prove the disability. Hence, the petitioner is
SCCH-2 14 MVC.No.4654/2023not entitled for any compensation under the head loss of
Future Income due to disabiltiy.
18. Medical Expenses:- According to petitioner, he
has spent Rs.5,00,000/- towards medical, nourishment
and attendant charges. In the instant case, the petitioner
has produced 15 medical bills, which were marked as
Ex.P.12. On perusal of these documents, it appears to this
Tribunal that, the petitioner has incurred Rs.59,643/-
towards medical expenses. After careful perusal of the
medical bills, this Tribunal is of the opinion that, petitioner
is entitled for Rs.59,643/- towards medical expenses.
19. Pain and suffering:- As per Ex.P.9 and Ex.P.11,
the petitioner has sustained right shoulder – fracture of
lateral end clavicle and he has taken treatment as an
inpatient from 18.06.2023 to 20.06.2023. Further the
contents of Ex.P11 reveals that, the petitioner has
undergone surgery in the form of ORIF with cora clavicular
reconstruction right side. As such, the petitioner has
SCCH-2 15 MVC.No.4654/2023
suffered a lot of pain and inconvenience. Considering all
these aspects, this Tribunal is awarded compensation of
Rs.25,000/- under the head of Pain and Sufferings.
20. Loss of income during the laidup period:-
The petitioner has produced discharge summary and
same has been marked as Ex.P.11. On perusal of this
document, it appears to this Tribunal that, the petitioner
took treatment as an inpatient for 3 days. Naturally it
shows that, he might have taken atleast one month rest
because of the injuries. The petitioner has averred that, he
was selling cloths and earning Rs.30,000/- p.m. In order
to prove the same the petitioner has not produced any
documents. Hence, this Tribunal taken the notional
income of petitioner as Rs.16,000/- per month by relying
on the judgment of Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka
decided in M.F.A. No.101144 of 2020 ( MV-I) on
05.07.2023, between Ananda Vs. Arun and Another.
Hence, one month is to be considered as loss of income
SCCH-2 16 MVC.No.4654/2023
during laidup period. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled
for Rs.16,000/- as compensatin under the head of loss of
income during laid up period.
21. Food, Nourishment and Atttendant charges:-
According to the petitioner, he has spent some
amount towards medical, nourishment and attendant
charges. The petitioner has not produced any documents
in this regard. In so for as food, conveyance, nourishment
and other incidental charges are concerned, the petitioner
has taken treatment as inpatinet for about 3 days. Hence,
looking to the injuries sustained and the period of
treatment taken by the petitioner, he is entitled for
compensation of Rs.5,000/- under the head of Food,
Nourishment and Atttendant charges.
22. Loss of future amenities and happiness:- The
petitioner was aged about 39 years at the time of accident.
The petitioner has not examined the medical witness to
show that, he has sustained any disability and physical
SCCH-2 17 MVC.No.4654/2023
deformity due to accidental injuries. Therefore, he is not
entitled for compensation under this head.
23. Future medical expenses:- The petitioner has
not stated anything towards future medical expenses.
Hence, he is not entitled any compensation towards future
medical expenses.
24. Thus, the petitioner is entitled for compensation
under the following heads:
Heads Amount
1.Towards loss of Future income. - Nil -
2. Towards Medical Expenses. Rs. 59,643/-
3. Towards Pain & Suffering.
Rs. 25,000/-
4. Loss of income during the
laidup 16,000/-
period
5. Food, Nourishment Atttendant 5,000/-
and transportation charges
6. Loss of future amenities and - Nil -
happiness.
7. Towards future medical - Nil -
expenses.
Total. Rs.1,05,643/-
SCCH-2 18 MVC.No.4654/2023
Hence, petitioner is entitled for just and reasonable
amount of Rs.1,05,643/-.
25. Regarding liability and interest.
Driving License:- Charge sheet submitted by IO does
not reveals that the driver of offending Mahindra XUV Car
bearing No. KA.05.MY.2077 was driving the vehicle
without valid and effective DL. Therefore, it appears to this
Tribunal that, the driver of the offending vehicle was
holding valid D.L. to drive the offending vehicle at the time
of accident.
Insurance Policy :- In the written statement the
respondent No.2 has admitted the issuance of insurance
policy with respect to Mahindra XUV Car bearing No.
KA.05.MY.2077 and was in force as on the date of
accident. Hence, the respondent No.2 shall pay
compensation amount to the petitioner.
Interest: In view of the decision reported in MFA
NO: 30131-2019 dtd, 12.5.2020 and
SCCH-2 19 MVC.No.4654/2023
M.F.A.No.100090/2014 C/w M.F.A.No.25107/2013
between Vijay Ishwar Jadhav and Others Vs. Ulrich
Belchior Fernandes and Another, rate of interest on the
compensation amount is awarded at 6% p.a. from the date
of petition. Accordingly, Issue No.2 is answered in the
Partly Affirmative.
26. ISSUE No.3:- In view of discussions made
above, I proceed to pass the following.
:ORDER:
Claim petition filed by the Petitioner
U/Sec.166 of M.V. Act is partly allowed
with costs of the petition.
Petitioner is awarded just and reasonable
compensation of Rs.1,05,643/- (Rupees
One lakh five thousand six hundred and
forty three only) with interest at the rate of
6% p.a., from the date of petition to till the
date of depositing of the compensation
amount in the Tribunal.
Respondent No.2 shall deposit the
compensation in the Tribunal within 2
months from the date of this judgment.
SCCH-2 20 MVC.No.4654/2023
Advocate’s fee is fixed at Rs.1,000/-.
Draw Award Accordingly.
:APPORTIONMENT:
Considering the compensation amount
awarded to the petitioner it is directed to
release the entire amount.
(Dictated to the Stenographer directly on computer, typed
by her, corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in
the open court on this the 21st day of July 2025).
(H.P. Mohan Kumar)
VI Addl. Judge, Court of Small Causes,
and ACJM, MACT, Bengaluru: ANNEXURE :
List of witnesses examined for petitioner:
P.W.1 : Sri. Zakir Khan @ Zakir Ahmed Khan.
List of exhibited documents marked for petitioner:
Ex.P-1 : True copy of complaint. Ex.P-2 : True copy of FIR. Ex.P-3 : True copy of spot mahazar. Ex.P-4 : True copy of spot sketch. SCCH-2 21 MVC.No.4654/2023 Ex.P-5 : True copy of seizer mahazar. Ex.P-6 & : True copies of notice and reply U/Sec.133 7 Ex.P-8 : True copy of IMV report. Ex.P-9 : True copy of wound certificate. Ex.P-10 : True copy of charge sheet and statement of injured. Ex.P-11 : Discharge summary. Ex.P-12 : Medical bills (15 in nos). Ex.P-13 : Medical prescriptions (6 in nos). Ex.P-14 : Notarized copy of Aadhar card. Ex.P-15 : Notarized copy of PAN card.
List of witnesses examined for the Respondents:
– None –
List of exhibited documents marked for the
Respondents:
– Nil –
Digitally signed by H
HP P MOHANKUMAR
MOHANKUMAR Date: 2025.07.23
11:01:15 +0530
(H.P. Mohan Kumar)
VI Addl. Judge, Court of Small Causes,
and ACJM, MACT, Bengaluru
[ad_2]
Source link