HC overturns MACT ruling, awards Rs26.8 lakh compensation to victim’s kin

NT Correspondent

Bengaluru: Overturning the order of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (MACT), which had denied compensation to the kin of an accident victim, the High Court of Karnataka has awarded a compensation of Rs.26,85,000.

The MACT refused to compensate the kin due to the missing signature of the investigating officer on the charge sheet filed against the driver of the offending vehicle.

The MACT had accepted the copy of the charge sheet taken from the police station, which did not have the signature of the investigating officer, however, it failed to consider the copy of the charge sheet filed before a Trial Court, which had the signature of the said police inspector.

“That document is produced only for the purpose of clarification. Therefore, there is no impediment to receive the same as additional evidence, more particularly when those documents were not disputed by the respondents even before the tribunal,” the division bench of KS Mudagal and Justice Ramachandra D Huddar said in their recent judgment awarding the compensation.

Sathisha aka Sathyappa met with an accident on October 28, 2021, while riding a motor cycle in Srinivasapura. A private bus had hit him causing the accident. Sathisha suffered grievous injuries and succumbed to death.

His wife and two minor daughters approached the MACT for compensation. Regarding the accident, a complaint was filed before the Srinivasapura Police Station alleging actionable negligence on part of the bus driver.

A case was registered and a charge sheet was also filed in the criminal case. In the MACT, a claim was made for compensation of Rs.50,00,000.

The tribunal on hearing the parties by the impugned award, dismissed the petition on the sole ground that Ex.P8, the copy of the charge sheet produced by the claimants, does not bear the signature of the investigating officer.

Therefore, the same is not admissible in evidence, the MACT had ruled. The MACT further held that no proper documents were produced to prove that the charge sheet was filed against the driver of the bus. The woman and her two children filed an appeal in the HC earlier this year and the bench gave its judgement recently.

The HC accepted the additional evidence of the charge sheet against the bus driver with the signature of the concerned investigating officer. The HC said the MACT was wrong in not considering the additional evidence.

“The tribunal without appreciating the aforesaid evidence, taking a very technical/narrow view held that the claimants have failed to prove occurrence of the accident due to actionable negligence on the part of the driver of the bus and dismissed the petition, such finding is unsustainable,” it said.

The HC itself awarded the compensation of Rs.26,85,000 instead of sending the matter back to the MACT for adjudication.

“In the ordinary course, in such cases the matter would have been remanded for determining the compensation or to consider that issue,” the HC said.

But since the issue was already subjected to cross-examination and not rebutted, the HC, while awarding the compensation, said, “Under the circumstances, exercise of computing the damages can be done by this court only instead of remanding the matter.” (MFA 1267/2023)