Dismissed

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

Karnataka HC23 Jan 2024MFA/20179/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Insurance company appealed against an award by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. The Court held that since the consumer forum set aside its earlier award for the claimant against another insurer, the claimant was entitled to the Tribunal's award. The appeal was dismissed and the amount ordered for transmission.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed. Amount in deposit transmitted to the Tribunal for disbursement in accordance with law.

Reliance Gen.Ins. Co. Ltd. Vs P. Mustahanbi W/O… — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC-D:1930 MFA No. 20179 of 2012

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA

¶7

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 20179 OF 2012 (MV-DM)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

RELIANCE GEN.INS. CO. LTD, BRANCH OFFICE, BELLARY, REPRESENTED BY ITS DEPUTY MANAGER, LEGAL CLAIMS, CTS, 472-474, V. A. KALBURGI SQUARE, DESAI CIRCLE, DESHAPANDE NAGAR, HUBLI.

¶10

…APPELLANT

¶11

(BY SRI. N. C. KOLLOORI, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

SMT. P. MUSTAHANBI W/O. HUSSAINSAB, AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, (LANDLORD CUM OWNER), R/O. 7TH WARD, NEAR JAKKERUBHAVI, KUDITHINI VILLAGE, TQ & DIST: BELLARY.

¶14

Digitally SAMREEN signed by AYUB SAMREEN DESHNUR AYUB DESHNUR

¶15

SRI. D. DELEEP S/O. D. SHANKAR, AGE: 38 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER, R/O. KURIA VILLAGE, KANDAR TALUK, NANDEED DISTRICT.

¶16

SRI. P. NARASIMHAREDDY S/O. RAJIREDDY, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. RAMPALLY KESARA, RANGAREDDY DISTRICT, ANDRAPRADESH.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI. MANJUNATH G. PATIL, ADV. FOR RESPONDENT NO.1, NOTICE TO RESPONDENT NO.2 DISPENSED WITH, NOTICE TO RESPONDENT NO.3 SERVED)

¶19

THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED U/SEC.173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS AND TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD 6^TH AUGUST 2011 PASSED BY THE MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL-X BELLARY IN MVC

¶20

2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:1930 MFA No. 20179 of 2012

¶21

NO.1237/2010 ON THE FOLLOWING FACTS AND AMONG OTHER GROUNDS AND TO PASS SUCH OTHER ORDER OR ORDERS AS THIS HON’BLE COURT DEEMS FIT UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE INCLUDING THE COSTS IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶22

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

¶23

JUDGMENT

¶24

Heard Sri.Nagaraj C Kolloori, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri.Manjunath G Patil, learned counsel for respondent No.1.

¶25

A claim petition came to be filed by owner of tractor and trailer unit bearing Reg.No.KA-34/7391-7392 in respect of a road traffic accident occurred on 23.06.2010 at about 5.30 p.m. involving lorry bearing Reg.No.AP-29/V-3159. The tractor sustained huge damages and surveyor was appointed and tractor got repaired. The Tribunal awarded Rs.1,46,465/- taking note of the material evidence placed on record.

¶26

Being aggrieved by the same, the Insurance Company is in appeal.

¶27

Reiterating the grounds urged in the appeal memorandum Sri.Nagaraj C Kolloori, learned counsel for the appellant contended that the claimant also approached the

¶28

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:1930 MFA No. 20179 of 2012

¶29

District Consumer Forum, Ballari wherein compensation was awarded in a sum of Rs.1,29,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the Insurance Company and therefore, the claimant is not entitled to compensation twice for the same damages.

¶30

Per contra, learned counsel for respondent

¶31

submitted that being aggrieved by the said judgment passed by the District Consumer Forum, the New India Assurance Company Limited has preferred an appeal before the Karnataka State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bengaluru. The claimant contested the said appeal.

¶32

Hon’ble State Consumer Commission taking note of the rival contentions of the parties, allowed the appeal and dismissed the claim petition of the claimant against its own insurer namely New India Assurance Company Limited.

¶33

Thereby, an amount of Rs.1,29,000/- which is

¶34

awarded by the District Consumer Forum, Ballari in favour of the claimant is set aside.

¶35

In view of above factual aspects, since the claimant has not received any compensation from his insurer by virtue of

¶36

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:1930 MFA No. 20179 of 2012

¶37

the judgment passed by the Consumer Forum and awarded by the Tribunal, which is impugned in the present appeal needs to be satisfied by the appellant herein.

¶38

Accordingly, the following :

¶39

ORDER

¶40

i) Appeal is dismissed.

¶41

ii) Amount in deposit is ordered to be

¶42

transmitted to the tribunal for disbursement in

¶43

accordance with law.

¶44

Sd/JUDGE

¶45

SH/SMM/HMB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 46

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

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

Gouramma W/O Irappa Herur Vs Manjunath S/O Basappa Guled

Nagappa @ Nagesh Vs Nazir Ahmed Gousemohiddn Mulla

Shivaleela W/O. Chanabasappa Itagi Vs the Managing Director

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

Venkatesh Hanumantappa Waddar @ Bhovi Vs the Divisional Manager

The Manager Vs Gururaj Baburay Pai