1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

M.F.A.No.............../2019

IN THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & THE

ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL AT
CHANNAGIRI
M.V.C.No........../2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

M.F.A.No.............../2019

Between Rank of the parties in

/ /
In MACT Court High Court
Ramesha. C,
W/o. Aneppa,
aged about 64 years,
R/at. T.B.Road,
Channagiri Taluk,
Davanagere District. Respondent -2 Appellant

And :

1. xyz
Channagiri Taluk,
Davanagere District. Petitioner Respondent -1

2. Raghavendra B.B. @ Swamy

S/o. Basavarajappa,
Major,
Bus driver,
R/o. Bankanakatte,
Javoor post,
Tarikere Taluk,
Chikmagalore District. Respondent-1 Respondent -2

3. Manager,
Reliance General Insurance
Company Ltd,
 2

Branch Office,
Sadiq Complex,
Opp: Sundar Ashraya
N.T.Road, Shimoga ,
Shimoga District Respondent-3 Respondent-3

MEMORANDUM OF MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL

UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE MOTOR VECHILES
ACT:

The Appellant above named respectfully submits as follows:

1. The addresses of the parties of both the sides for the

purpose of issuance of court notice, summons etc, from the
office of this Hon’ble court are as stated in the cause title
above. However the appellant may also be served through
his counsel Shankar .D. ..............

2. The appellant being aggrieved by order passed by the

Honble Senior Civil Judge & M.A.C.T , Channagiri, in
M.V.C.No.559/2016 dated 28.9.2018 is preferring the
above appeal seeking for award against the respondent
No.3 Insurance company on the following facts and
grounds. The appellant is herewith produce the certified
copy of the order passed by the Tribunal Court for kind
perusal of this Hon'ble Court.

FACTS OF THE CASE

3. It is submitted that on 4.10.2015 at about 11.45 a.m, in

the morning wherein the petitioner along with co pass

angers was travelling in the bus bearing Reg.No.KA-14-

9129 and because of rash and negligent driving of the bus
by its driver , the bus was toppled down result in the
 3

petitioner and co-passangers suffered injuries and after

treatment and recovery have filed the petition claiming
compensation.

GROUNDS

4. The order passed by the Hon’ble Tribunal is opposed to

principles of natural justice and unsustainable in the eye of
law.

5. That the Hon’ble Tribunal has not looked into the

documents properly and has mechanically passed the order
hence the same is liable to be set aside against the
appellant.

6. That the award passed by the Hon’ble Tribunal is highly

exorbitant and not as per the documents.

7. The appellant is the owner of the bus having driving

licence and also having valid Insurance with the
Respondent No.2 in respect of the aforesaid vehicle . As
such the entire burden should be upon the respondent
No.3. but the Hon’ble tribunal has casted the burden upon
the appellant.

8. The appellant has not committed any offence as alleged

by the petitioner in the lower court.
 4

9. The appellant has complied all the conditions of the

policy. But the tribunal has awarded the amount against
the appellant .

10. The appellant was placed exparte in the Trial Court.

All the information was handed over to the Insurance
company . The trial court come to the conclusion that the
owner of the vehicle in question do not possess valid permit
to ply over the road. In this regard, the appellant is having
valid permit. The appellant has obtained the permission
from Karnataka State Transport Appellate Tribunal ,
Bangalore consideration of the validity of the permit and
also directed by the Karnataka State Tribunal Bangalore to
approach for the RTO, Davanagere. Accordingly the
appellant has approached RTO Davanagere and filed an
application for renewal of permit and filed all the relevant
documents and necessary fees. Hence the liability is lies
upon the respondent No.3 i.e. Insurance company but not
the appellant.

11. Viewed from any angle, the award passed by the

Hon’ble Trtibunal is liable to be rejected.

PRAYER

Wherefore, the Appellant humbly pray that this Hon’ble

Court be pleased to set aside the award passed by the
Hon’ble Tribunal in MVC No.559/2016 on the file of
Hon’ble Senior civil judge & MACT, at Channagiri dated
28.09.2018.
 5

VALUATION

Since the appellant is seeking for rejection of the award

amount passed by the Hon’ble Tribunal, a fixed court fee
of Rs.15/- is paid under Article –III (iii)(ia) and Schedule-II
of the K.C.F. & S V Act, 1958.

Bangalore,
Date: / /2019 Advocate for Appellant
(Sateeshchandra K.V.)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

M.F.A.No.............../2019

Between
 6

Ramesha. C. Appellant

And :

Smt. Jayabai & others. Respondents.

SYNOPSIS

Sl.No. Date Events

1. Date of accident : 4.10.2015

2. Age of the injured : 60 years.
3. Vehicle involved in
the accident : Bus bearing reg. No.
KA-14 –9129 .

4. Nature of Injuries. : 1.half inch lacerated wound

over forehead,
2. tenderness over nose
3 Bleding present.

5. Compensation awarded
Under different heads
: Towards pain and
suffering Rs.20,000
loss of amenities
Rs.7,000/ and Nursing
and attendance charges
Rs.4,000/- , medical and
other incidental charges
20,000/-. Total Rs.51,000

6. Date of order : 28.9.2018

BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE

 7

1. It is submitted that on 4.10.2015 at about 11.45 a.m, in

the morning wherein the petitioner along with co pass
angers was travelling in the bus bearing Reg.No.KA-14-
9129 and because of rash and negligent driving of the bus
by its driver , the bus was toppled down result in the
petitioner and co-passangers suffered injuries and after
treatment and recovery have filed the petition claiming
compensation, the Hon’ble Lower Court /tribunal as has
awarded the compensation against the appellant instead of
respondent No.3/Insurance company. Being aggrieved by
the same, the appellant is preferring the above
Miscellaneous First Appeal.

Bangalore
Date: / /2019 Advocate for Appellant
(Sateeshchandra K.V.)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

 8

M.F.A.No.............../2019

Between

Ramesha. C. Appellant

And :

Smt. Jayabai & others. Respondents

INDEX

Sl.No. Particulars. Page No.

1. Synopsis.
2. Memorandum of Miscellaneous
First Appeal.
3. Certified copy of the Judgment
& award in MVC.No.599/2016
4. Vakalath.
5. I.A with affidavit for condonation
6. I.A with affidavit for stay.

Bengaluru
Date: / /2019 Advocate for Appellant
(Sateeshchandra K.V.)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

 9

M.F.A.No.............../2019

Between

Ramesha. C,
W/o. Aneppa,
aged about 64 years,
R/at. T.B.Road,
Channagiri Taluk,
Davanagere District. Appellant

And :

1. Smt. Jayabai
W/o. Rudranaika,
aged about 63 years,
Occupation : Coolie
R/o. Maravanji Thanda Village,
Channagiri Taluk,
Davanagere District.

2. Raghavendra B.B. @ Swamy

S/o. Basavarajappa,
Major,
Bus driver,
R/o. Bankanakatte,
Javoor post,
Tarikere Taluk,
Chikmagalore District.

3. Manager,
Reliance General Insurance
Company Ltd,
Branch Office,
Sadiq Complex,
Opp: Sundar Ashraya
N.T.Road, Shimoga ,
Shimoga District Respondents

APPLICATION UNDER SEC.5 OF THE LIMITATION ACT :

 10

That for the reasons sworn to in the accompanying

affidavit, the appellant above named humbly prays that
this Hon’ble Court be pleased to condone the delay of
days in preferring the above appeal, in the interest of
justice and equity.

Bangalore
Date: / /2019 Advocate for Appellant
(Sateeshchandra K.V.)
 11

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

M.F.A.No.............../2019

Between

Ramesha. C. Appellant

And :

Smt.Jayabai & others. Respondents

AFFIDAVIT

I, Ramesha. C, W/o. Aneppa, aged about 64 years, R/at.

T.B.Road, Channagiri Taluk, Davanagere District, now at
Bengaluru, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as
follows :-

1. I state that I am the appellant in the above appeal and

applicant in the accompanying application. I know the
facts of the case, hence I am swearing to this affidavit.

2. I state that I have filed the above Miscellaneous First

Appeal being aggrieved by the order passed by the lower
court by casting upon the burden upon me by directing me
to pay the award amount instead of casting upon the
respondent No.3. As such the averments made in the
Memorandum of First Appeal may kindly be read as part
and parcel of this affidavit to avoid the repetition.

3. I state that I could not able to file the above appeal in

time prescribed under the law as I could not arrange the
amount to file the above appeal and also I state that I am
 12

not educated. As such there is a little bit delay in preferring

the above appeal which is not intentional or deliberate on
my part but due to bonafide reasons as stated supra.
Hence it is just, proper and necessary to condone the delay
in filing the above appeal as we are having valid and good
case on merits.

4. I state that if the application is allowed, no hardship or

injury would be caused to the respondents. On the
contrary, if the application is not allowed, I will be exposed
to serious hardship and injury beyond estimation in terms
of money and expression in terms of words. Hence the
application.

Wherefore, I humbly pray that this Hon’ble Court be

pleased to allow the accompanying application as prayed
for, in the interest of justice and equity.

I, the deponent above named do hereby verify and declare

that what is stated above is true and correct to the best of
my knowledge, information and belief.

Identified by me,

Advocate.
Bangalore
Date: / /2019
No. of Corrs:
 13

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

M.F.A.No.............../2019

Between

Ramesha. C,
W/o. Aneppa,
aged about 64 years,
R/at. T.B.Road,
Channagiri Taluk,
Davanagere District. Appellant

And :

1. Smt. Jayabai
W/o. Rudranaika,
aged about 63 years,
Occupation : Coolie
R/o. Maravanji Thanda Village,
Channagiri Taluk,
Davanagere District.

2. Raghavendra B.B. @ Swamy

S/o. Basavarajappa,
Major, Bus driver,
R/o. Bankanakatte,
Javoor post,
Tarikere Taluk,
Chikmagalore District.

3. Manager,
Reliance General Insurance
Company Ltd,
Branch Office,
Sadiq Complex,
Opp: Sundar Ashraya
N.T.Road, Shimoga ,
Shimoga District Respondents

APPLICATION UNDER ORDER 41 RULE 5 R/W SEC.151

OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE ;
 14

That for the reasons sworn to in the accompanying

affidavit, the appellant above named humbly prays that
this Hon’ble Court be pleased to pass an order of stay,
staying the operation and enforcement of the order dated
28.9.2018 passed by the Hon’ble Lower court/Tribunal in
MVC No.559/2016 on the file of Principal Senior Civil
Judge & M.A.C.T, Channagiri , pending disposal of the
above appeal, in the interest of justice and equity.

Bengaluru,
Date: / /2019 Advocate for Appellant
(Sateeshchandra K.V.)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

 15

M.F.A.No.............../2019

Between

Ramesha. C. Appellant

And :

Smt.Jayabai & others. Respondents

AFFIDAVIT

I, Ramesha. C, W/o. Aneppa, aged about 64 years, R/at.

T.B.Road, Channagiri Taluk, Davanagere District, now at
Bengaluru, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as
follows :-

1. I state that I am the appellant in the above appeal and

applicant in the accompanying application. I know the
facts of the case, hence I am swearing to this affidavit.

2. I state that I have filed the above Miscellaneous First

Appeal being aggrieved by the order passed by the lower
court by casting upon the burden upon me by directing me
to pay the award amount instead of casting upon the
burden on respondent No.3. As such the averments
made in the Memorandum of First Appeal may kindly be
read as part and parcel of this affidavit to avoid the
repetition.

3. I state that I am not liable to satisfy the award amount

as I am having valid DL, and policy in respect of the vehicle
in question and moreover I have not violated any of the
 16

terms of the policy . Taking undue advantage of the said

impugned award amount, the 1st respondent may proceed
to file execution petition seeking implementation of the said
impugned order. Hence it is just, proper and necessary to
stay the operation and enforcement of the award amount
or otherwise, I will be exposed to immense hardship, injury,
loss and mental agony irreparably beyond estimation in
terms of money and expression in terms of words. Hence
this application.

4. I state that if the application is allowed, no hardship or

injury would be caused to the respondents. On the
contrary, if the application is not allowed, I will be exposed
to serious hardship and injury beyond estimation in terms
of money and expression in terms of words.

Wherefore, I humbly pray that this Hon’ble Court be

pleased to allow the accompanying application as prayed
for, in the interest of justice and equity.

What is stated above is true and correct.

Identified by me,

Advocate.
Bangalore
Date: / /2019 Deponent
17