1. Challenging impugned judgment and award dated 13.03.2015 passed by Presiding Officer , Fast Track Court and MACT-XI, Jamakhandi, in MVC No .421/2011, this appeal is filed by claimant.

2. Brief facts as stated are that on 19.01.2009 , claimant was traveling on motorcycle bearing no.KA48/E-3431 along with his brother , when another motorcycle bearing no.KA-23/Q-3976 came from opposite direction and there was collision between both motorcycles. In accident, claimant sustained grievous injuries and was admitted to BLDE hospital, Bijapur . Therea fter, he took further treatment at Ashwini Sahakari hospital, Solapur. Despite treatment he did not recover fully and sustained physical disability. There fore, filed claim petition under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, against owner and insurer of other motorcycle.

3. Upon service of notice, respondent entered appearance and opposed claim petition on all counts.

4. Thereafter, tribunal framed issues and recorded evidence of claimant as PW.1 and got marked Exhibits P1 to P64. In rebuttal, respondent examined its official as RW.1 and got marked Exs.R1 to R7. Therefore , tribunal passed award. While passing impugned award , tribunal observed that there was inconsistency regarding claimant being a rider or pillion rider of motorcycle and therefore, he failed to prove rash and negligent riding of rider of offending vehicle .

5. Sri Siddappa Saj jan , learned counsel for appellant – claimant submitted that admittedly accident was involving two motorcycles. When police investigation records namely, complaint, FIR and charge sheet as per Exs.P2, P1 and P6 respectively were against rider of other motorcycle , tribunal was not justified in dismissing claim petition . On above ground , learned counsel sought for setting aside judgment and award and remand of matter for purpose of reconsideration and for assessment of compensation.

6. On other hand , Smt.Anusha , learned counsel for Sri S.K .Kayakamath, learned counsel appearing for respondent no.2-insurer submitted that in view of glaring inconsistency between statement of claimant and owner of vehicle, award passed by tribunal was justified as claim petition was not bona fide .

7. Heard learned counsel, perused impugned judgment and award and records.

8. From above submission , only point that arises for consideration is:

“Whether impugned judgment and award passed by tribunal calls for inter ference”

9. The only reason assigned by tribunal for dismissing claim petition is inconsistency insofar as status of claimant whether as rider or pillion rider of motorcycle bearing registration no .KA-48/E-3431. However, submission of learned counsel for claimant / appellant that when police investigation records indicate negligence of other vehicle, there would be no justification for tribunal to deny compensation to claimant as stated in claim petition regardless of fact whether he is rider or pillion rider as he would be third party. Submission of learned counsel deserves consideration . If claimants are able to establish that it was other vehicle rider who was rash and negligent in causing accident, then they would be entitled to maintain claim petition and dismissal would not be justified . In view of above, reasons assigned by tribunal for dismissing claim petition would be perverse. Accordingly and without any more point for consideration is answered in affirmative.

10. Consequently, following:

ORDER

i. Appeal is allowed.

ii. Impugned award is set aside.

iii. Matter is remanded back to tribunal for fresh consideration.

iv. It would be available for tribunal to appreciate entire evidence on record afresh without being in fluenced by its earlier award or observation of this Court and pass fresh award in accordance with law.

v. To facilitate early disposal and as both parties are represented through their respective counsel, they are directed to appear before tribunal without receipt of notice on 06.03.2023. Thereafter , tribunal shall pass fresh award as early as possible.