M. C. Shivanna, S/o Channaveeregowda v. C. T. Nagesha, S/o Thimmegowda
2017-02-06
A.S.BOPANNA
body2017
DigiLaw.ai
ORDER : The petitioner is before this Court assailing the order dated 22.03.2012 passed in Misc. Petition Nos. 47/2009 & 48/2009 impugned at Annexure ‘F’ to the petition. The petitioner in that light is seeking issue of mandamus to direct the 2nd respondent to pay the compensation as awarded by the Tribunal in MVC Nos. 991/2007 and 992/2007 under the Judgment and Award dated 28.05.2009. 2. The petitioners are the claimants in MVC Nos.991/2007 & 992/2007. At the first instance the Tribunal had passed the judgment and award dated 28.05.2009 whereunder the compensation was awarded and the liability was fixed on the Insurance Company to pay the amount. Subsequently, the Insurance Company filed the review petitions in MVC Petitions No. 47/2009 and 48/2009 seeking exoneration of their liability and to hold the owner of the vehicle to be liable to pay the compensation. The Tribunal by the order dated 22.03.2012 has accepted the contention, allowed the review petition and fastened the liability on the owner of the vehicle by exonerating the Insurance Company. It is against such order the petitioners are before this Court. 3. In a matter relating to the compensation payable and the liability thereto as provided under the Motor Vehicles Act, if the petitioner has any grievance with regard to the Judgment and award passed by the Tribunal including the modification of the Judgment and Award through the Review petition, the petitioners would have to avail the remedy of appeal as provided under Section 173 of the Act. 4. It is also relevant to note that one other claimant in respect of the same accident had filed such an appeal in M.F.A. No.3591/2010 which has been considered and disposed of by this Court through the Judgment dated 03.06.2015. In that light liberty is reserved to the petitioner to file an appeal. Needless to mention that the petitioner is entitled to seek for consideration of the time spent in prosecuting this petition instead of availing the alternate remedy for seeking condonation of delay. In terms of the above, petition stands disposed of. Registry is directed to return the papers, if any sought, to the learned counsel for the petitioner to enable him to file the appeal.