Claimant's appeal for enhancement of motor accident compensation. The insurer was exonerated as the bus driver lacked a valid driving licence, and the appeal against the owner was dismissed for non-prosecution, leaving no one liable; hence no merits hearing was possible.
None granted; appeal dismissed with no order as to costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:3387 MFA No. 100405 of 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.100405 OF 2014 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
LOKESH S/O. KESHAV NAIK, AGE: 20 YEARS, OCC: NIL, R/O: KEROLLI, MUDKANI, TALUK: HONAVAR, DIST: UTTAR KANNADA.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. VIDYASHANKAR G. DALAWAI, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. G.M. BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally
signed by
SAROJA
SAROJA HANGARAKI
HANGARAKI Date:
2024.02.19
16:05:59
+0530
…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. BAHUBALI A.DANAWADE, ADVOCATE FOR R2; R1 DISMISSED) THIS M.F.A. IS FILED U/SEC.173(1) OF MV ACT 1988, AGAINST JUDGMENT AND AWARD DTD:07.08.2012, PASSED IN MVC.NO.64/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL MACT AT HONAVAR, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Heard Sri.Vidyashankar G. Dalawai, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Sri.G.M.Bhat, learned counsel for the appellant.
A claim petition came to be filed in respect of road traffic injury sustained by the claimant in a road traffic accident dated 27.04.2009 at about 9.45 p.m. involving a private bus bearing No.KA-01/AA-1213.
valid driving license as on the date of accident and he was
also prostituted under Section 3 of Motor Vehicles Act.
respondent No.1, who is the owner, for not taking appropriate steps. Insurance Company is held not liable to pay the compensation.
for hearing the appeal on merits. Accordingly, following:
ORDER
(ii) No order as to costs.
KAV
List No.: 2 Sl No.: 26
Sd/JUDGE
1 issue framed by the court
Whether compensation awarded by the MACT should be enhanced where the insurer was exonerated and the appeal against the owner stood dismissed for non-prosecution.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Lokesh s/o. Keshav Naik
M. Gopal Rao
ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd.
V.Srishananda
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
