Partly allowed

National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Kum Swetha D L

Karnataka HC18 Jan 2023MFA/6223/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeal filed by an Insurance Company challenging a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal award due to the driver's alleged lack of license. The Court found the insurer liable to pay the claimant first as a third party before recovering the amount from the vehicle owner based on specific Motor Vehicles Act sections.

What did the court decide?

Appeal allowed in part; Appellant must satisfy the claimant first and then recover the compensation from the vehicle owner.

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Kum Swetha D L — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

MFA No. 6223 of 2015

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 6223 OF 2015 (MV-I)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

NATIONAL INSURANCE CO., LTD., MARATHAHALLI BRANCH, BANGALORE-37. THROUGH ITS REGIONAL OFFICE, NO.144, SUBHARAM COMPLEX, M.G.ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001. REP BY IT’S ADMN. OFFICER, MRS. REKHA S.MENON

¶8

Digitally signed by JAI JYOTHI J Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶9

…APPELLANT

¶10

(BY SRI. SEETHARAMA RAO B.C., ADVOCATE APPEARING THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

KUM. SWETHA D.L AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, D/O LAKSHMANAPPA, RESIDENCE: MARUTHI NILAYA, BEHIND: MUNESHWARA TEMPLE, MUNESHWARA LAYOUT, NIDUVALLI, DAVANAGERE-577 002.

¶13

MR.SYED OMAR KHAIYAM MAJOR, S/O MR.SYED FAZAL KABIR, R/AT NO.23, 2^ND CROSS,

¶14

¶15

MFA No. 6223 of 2015

¶16

SRI VINAYAKA LAYOUT, OPP: S.G.R. DENTAL COLLEGE, MUNNEKOLALA, MARATHAHALLI MAIN ROAD, BANGALORE-560 037.

¶17

MR.KINSHUK DAS NO.1508, 25^TH MAIN, 26^TH A CROSS, H.S.R LAYOUT, SECTOR-2, PANYVA REVIEWER APARTMENT, PARANGIPALLY, BANGALORE-560 102.

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SRI. VENKATACHALAPATHY, ADVOCATE FOR R1, SRI. R SHASHIDHARA, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶20

THIS MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:15.4.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.1368/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE, 27^TH ACMM, MACT, BENGALURU, AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF RS.3,79,003/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% P.A FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL COMPLETE REALIZATION (FUTURE MEDICAL EXPENSES SHALL NOT CARRY ANY INTEREST).

¶21

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

JUDGMENT

¶23

The present appeal is filed by the appellantInsurance Company challenging the judgment and award dated 15.04.2015 in MVC.No.1368/2013 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore (SCCH-11), questioning the liability on the ground that the driver of the motor vehicle bearing No.KA-01-EX-2068 was not

¶24

¶25

MFA No. 6223 of 2015

¶26

holding driving licence to drive the motor cycle as on the date of the accident.

¶27

The accident was caused on 26.01.2013. It was specifically contended by the Insurance Company before the Tribunal that the driver of the motor cycle was not holding driving licence as on the date of the accident. When such contention is raised by the Insurance Company, then it is the burden on the owner of the motor cycle or driver of the motor cycle to produce the driving licence, but they have not produced before the Tribunal. Therefore, it is proved that the driver of the motor cycle was not holding driving licence as on the date of the accident to drive the motor cycle.

¶28

Ex.R.6 is the driving licence extract, but the driver obtained the driving licence after the date of the accident on 26.01.2013. Therefore, it is proved that as on the date of the accident, the driver was not holding driving

¶29

¶30

MFA No. 6223 of 2015

¶31

licence to drive the motor cycle. Therefore, the Insurance Company is not liable to pay the compensation.

¶32

However, in view of Sub-section 2 of Section

¶33

147 of MV Act, if the Insurance Company is able to establish its defence, but the fact that the claimant is a third party, then the Insurance Company has to satisfy the claim at the first instance to the claimant and then recover it from the owner of the motor cycle bearing No.KA-01-EX2068 as per Sub-sections (1), (4), (7) of Section 149 of the MV Act and also as per the principles of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of National

¶34

Insurance Company Limited Vs. Swaran Singh

¶35

And Others¹ , Pappu And Others -V- Vinod Kumar Lamba and Another² and New India Assurance

¶36

Company Limited vs. Yellavva And Another³ .

¶37

1 (2004) 3 SCC 297

¶38

2 (2018) 3 SCC 208

¶39

3 2020 ACJ 2560 (HCK)

¶40

¶41

MFA No. 6223 of 2015

¶42

Therefore, an order of pay and recovery is made. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following

¶43

ORDER

¶44

I. Appeal is allowed-in-part .

¶45

II. The impugned judgment and award dated 15.04.2015 in MVC.No.1368/2013 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore (SCCH-11), is modified.

¶46

III. The appellant-Insurance Company shall satisfy the compensation to the claimant at the first instance, since the claimant is a third party and then recover it from the owner of the motor cycle bearing No.KA-01-EX-2068.

¶47