Allowed

The Manager, Sriram General v. Shabbhirahamad S/O. Mahmad Haneef Tekade

Karnataka HC24 Jan 2024MFA/100827/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the First Appeal filed by an insurance company. The Tribunal was set aside for awarding compensation against the appellant when the charge sheet indicated the opposing driver's negligence. The matter is remitted for fresh disposal with liberty to implead the opposing insurer.

What did the court decide?

The impugned award set aside, matter remitted for fresh disposal, deposited amount returned to appellant, and claimant permitted to implead the opposing insurer.

The Manager, Sriram General Vs Shabbhirahamad S/O. Mahmad Haneef… — Insurance | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC-D:1892 MFA No. 100827 of 2017

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024 BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA

¶6

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL No.100827 OF 2017 (MV-I)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

THE MANAGER, SRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD, RAJASTHAN, R/BY ITS BRANCH OFFICE @ HUBLI, TALUK: HUBLI, DISTRICT: DHARWAD. NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORITZED SIGNATORY, SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., NO. 5/4, 3RD FLOOR, S V ARCADE, BELEKAHALLI MAIN ROAD OFF. BENNURUGHATTA ROAD, IIMB POST, BANGALORE-560076.

¶9

…APPELLANT

¶10

(BY SRI. S K KAYAKAMATH, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

SHABBHIRAHAMAD S/O. MAHMAD HANEEF TEKADE, AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: ASAR ONI BANKAPUR, TALUK: SHIGGOAN, DISTRICT: HAVERI.-581110.

¶13

Digitally
signed by
SAROJA
SAROJA HANGARAKI
HANGARAKI Date:
2024.02.13
15:51:26
+0530

¶14

ABDUL HAMEED S/O. GUDUSAB SETSANADI, AGE: 47 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: KARAGUDARI, TALUK: HANGAL, DISTRICT: HAVERI-581110. (OWNER OF THE MAHINDRA TEMPO BEARING REGISTRATION NO. KA/27-3029)

¶15

SUNDAR RAJAN S/O. KANNAN, AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: MANIKYA SAGAR, STREET NO.1, AMMAPETH, SELAM-3, STATE: TAMIL NADU. (OWNER OF LORRY BEARING REGISTRATION NO. TN-30/AA-0895)

¶16

2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:1892 MFA No. 100827 of 2017

¶17

MANIKANDAN S/O. RAJU,

¶18

AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER, R/O: 1/45X- AMMANNA NAGAR, KATANACHAMPATTI, RASIPURAM, TALUK: NAMAKAL, DISTRICT: SELAM, STATE: TAMIL NADU. (DRIVER OF LORRY BEARING REGISTRATION NO. TN-30/AA-0895)

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SRI. B.M. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R1, SRI. R.H. ANGADI, ADVOCATE FOR R2, NOTICE TO R3 AND R4 ARE SERVED)

¶21

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 16.11.2016 PASSED IN MVC NO.266/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, HAVERI, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.28,000/WITH INTEREST AT 7% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ITS DEPOSIT.

¶22

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

¶23

JUDGMENT

¶24

Though the matter is listed for admission, by the consent

¶25

of the parties, it is taken up for final disposal.

¶26

Heard Sri S.K.Kayakamath, learned counsel for the Insurance Company and Sri B.M.Patil, learned counsel for respondent No.1.

¶27

Appeal is filed by the Insurer of the Mahindra Tempo bearing registration No.KA-27/3029 challenging the judgment and validity of the judgment and award dated 16.11.2016

¶28

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:1892 MFA No. 100827 of 2017

¶29

passed in MVC No.266/2015 on the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge and AMACT, Haveri.

¶30

Facts in brief which are utmost necessary for disposal of the appeal are as under:

¶31

In respect of the road traffic accident occurred on 02.11.2011 involving Mahindra Tempo bearing registration No.KA-27/3029 and lorry bearing registration No.TN-30/AA0895, a claim petition came to be filed under Section 166 of the MV Act by the injured viz., Shabbhirahamad.

¶32

The Tribunal, on contest, allowed the claim petition in a sum of Rs.28,000/- with interest at 7% per annum from the date of petition till realization and fastened the liability on the Insurer of Mahindra Tempo bearing registration No.KA27/3029, even though charge sheet is filed against the driver of the lorry bearing registration No.TN-30/AA-0895.

¶33

Sri S.K.Kayakamath, learned counsel for the Insurance Company contended that perusal of claim petition averments, appeal papers and the charge sheet clearly indicate that the accident has occurred on account of negligence of the driver of the lorry bearing registration No.TN-30/AA-0895.

¶34

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:1892 MFA No. 100827 of 2017

¶35

Despite such material evidence placed on record, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that it is the insurer of the Mahindra Tempo bearing registration No.KA-27/3029 which is required to pay compensation and therefore, the judgment has resulted in miscarriage of justice and sought for allowing the appeal.

¶36

Per contra, Sri B.M.Patil, learned counsel for the respondent No.1/claimant contended that due to inadvertence, insurer of the lorry is not made as party, though owner of the lorry is made as party to claim petition and therefore, sought for allowing the claimant to implead the insurer of the lorry bearing registration No.TN-30/AA-0895 and proceed with the case, in accordance with law, afresh.

¶37

In view of the rival contentions, perused the material on record.

¶38

As rightly contended by Sri S.K.Kayakamath, learned counsel for the appellant, when charge sheet is on the driver of the lorry, Tribunal, not noticing the same, awarded compensation to be paid by the insurer of the Mahindra tempo

¶39

5 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:1892 MFA No. 100827 of 2017

¶40

bearing registration No.KA-27/3029 and the same has resulted in miscarriage of justice. Therefore, case is made out to set aside the impugned judgment and award.

¶41

Having said thus, an opportunity needs to be provided to the claimant to implead the insurer of the lorry bearing registration No.TN-30/AA-0895 and proceed with the matter in accordance with law.

¶42

12. Accordingly, the following:

¶43

ORDER

¶44

(i) Appeal is allowed.

¶45

(ii) The impugned judgment and award dated 16.11.2016 passed in MVC No.266/2015 on the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge and AMACT, Haveri, is hereby set-aside.

¶46

(iii) The matter is remitted to the Tribunal for fresh disposal in accordance with law.

¶47

(iv) Claimant is at liberty to implead the insurer of the lorry bearing registration No.TN-30/AA0895 and proceed with the case in accordance with law.

¶48

6 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:1892 MFA No. 100827 of 2017

¶49

(v) The amount in deposit is ordered to be returned to the appellant/insurance company.

¶50

Sd/JUDGE

¶51

kcm LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 29

The Manager, Sriram General v. Shabbhirahamad S/O. Mahmad Haneef Tekade

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Manager, Sriram General v. Shabbhirahamad S/O. Mahmad Haneef Tekade

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Reliance Gen. Ins. Co. Ltd., Vs Basavva Somappa Badaradinni

Reliance Gen.Ins. Co. Ltd. Vs P. Mustahanbi W/O. Hussainasab

Venkatesh Hanumantappa Waddar @ Bhovi Vs the Divisional Manager

Smt Savitri W/O Bhimappa Devihosur Vs Shri Mohammed Sadath S/O Mohammed Amjad

Smt. Faridabanu W/O. Imtiyaz Kerimani Vs Mr. Imtiyaz S/O. Akbar

Sudhakar M Vs Hannur Swamy