Allowed

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

Karnataka HC23 Jan 2024MFA/20475/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Cross appeals from a motor-accident claim award: the claimant sought enhanced compensation while the insurer denied liability since no policy existed, only a cover note. The High Court enhanced compensation to Rs.1,00,000 payable by the vehicle owner and set aside the liability fastened on the insurer.

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced to Rs.1,00,000 with 6% interest recoverable from vehicle owner; insurer's liability set aside; deposit returned to insurer.

Reliance Gen. Ins. Co. Ltd., Vs Basavva Somappa Badaradinni — Insurance | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC-D:1845 MFA No. 22088 of 2012 C/W MFA No. 20475 of 2012

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2024 BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA

¶6

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 22088 OF 2012 (MV-I)

¶7

C/W

¶8

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 20475 OF 2012

¶9

IN MFA NO.22088 OF 2012:

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

BASAWWA W/O. SOMAPPA BADARDINNI AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/AT CHIKKA HANCHINAL, TQ: BILAGI, DIST: BAGALKOTE.

¶12

…APPELLANT

¶13

(BY SRI.S.S.YALIGAR AND SRI.M.T.BANGI, ADVOCATES)

¶14

AND:

¶15

SRI. PRAKASH S/O. IRAPPA SHEGUNSHI @ CHALAWADI, AGE: 35 YEARS, R/AT: GALAGALI, TQ: BILAGI, DIST: BAGALKOTE.

¶16

Digitally signed by SAROJA SAROJA HANGARAKI HANGARAKI Date: 2024.02.13 15:52:53 +0530

¶17

THE MANAGER RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., V.A.KALBURGI SQUARE,DESAI CROSS, DESHPANDE NAGAR, HUBLI, DIST: DHARWAD

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SRI.PRAVEEN GEJJI, ADVOCATE REPRESENTED SRI.S.S.BALLOLI, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI.N.L.KALLOORI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶20

THIS MFA IS FILED U/SEC.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 09-09-2011 PASSED IN MVC.NO.836/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER, MACT.NO.VII,

¶21

2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:1845 MFA No. 22088 of 2012 C/W MFA No. 20475 of 2012

¶22

BILAGI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR

¶23

COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶24

IN MFA NO.20475 OF 2012:

¶25

BETWEEN:

¶26

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.

¶27

…APPELLANT

¶28

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

¶29

AND:

¶30

SMT. BASAVVA SOMAPPA BADARADINNI AGE: 43 YEARS, OCC: VEGITABLE VENDOR, R/O: CHIKKA HANCHINAL, TQ: BILAGI, DIST: BAGALKOT.

¶31

SRI. PRAKASH IRAPPA SHEGUNASHI @ CHALAWADI, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: GALAGALI, TQ: BILAGI, DIST: BAGALKOT. …RESPONDENTS

¶32

(BY SRI.S.S.YALIGAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI.PRAVEEN GEJJI, REPRESENTED SRI.S.S.BALLOLI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶33

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF THE M.V.ACT, AGAINST THE

¶34

JUDGEMENT AND AWARD DATED 09.09.2011, PASSED IN MVC NO.836/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER, M.A.C.T.-VII, BILAGI, AWARDING THE COMPENSATION OF RS.78,780/- WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ITS REALIZATION.

¶35

¶36

NC: 2024:KHC-D:1845 MFA No. 22088 of 2012 C/W MFA No. 20475 of 2012

¶37

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

¶38

JUDGMENT

¶39

These two appeals are arising out of the judgment

¶40

and award passed in MVC No.836/2009 on the file of

¶41

Additional MACT-VII, Bilagi dated 09.09.2011.

¶42

Insurance company has challenged it’s liability on the

¶43

ground that there is no issuance of policy and only cover note is issued.

¶44

Claimant has challenged the impugned judgment on

¶45

the ground of awarding inadequacy of compensation.

¶46

This court has heard the arguments of Sri.S.S.Yaligar

¶47

and Sri.Mrutunjaya Tata Bangi for claimant,Sri.Praveen

¶48

Gejji, advocate representing Sri.Shivaraj S. Balloli for R1 and Sri.Nagaraj C. Kollori for respondent No.2.

¶49

Admitted facts in the appeal are that claimant suffered accidental injuries in a road traffic accident involving three wheeler bearing No.KA-48/5277 in a road

¶50

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:1845 MFA No. 22088 of 2012 C/W MFA No. 20475 of 2012

¶51

traffic accident that occurred on 03.07.2009 and he

¶52

sustained injuries and he was shifted to hospital.

¶53

Admittedly, charge sheet came to be filed against the driver of the said vehicle. Even though, cover note was produced before the trial court, the fact remains that the vehicle was not duly insured as on the date of accident.

¶54

Taking note of the injuries and the oral and documentary evidence placed on record, tribunal has awarded compensation in a sum of Rs.78,780/recoverable from the insurance company.

¶55

Since, the vehicle was not insured as on the date of accident and only cover note came to be issued, the liability fastened on the insurance company needs to be set aside and therefore appeal of the insurance company to be allowed and claimant be directed to recover the compensation from the owner of the offending vehicle.

¶56

Insofar as quantum of compensation is concerned, granting of Rs.1,00,000/- globally as against sum of

¶57

5 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:1845 MFA No. 22088 of 2012 C/W MFA No. 20475 of 2012

¶58

Rs.78,780/- granted by the tribunal as compensation would meet the ends of justice and the same is to be recovered from the owner of the vehicle.

¶59

Accordingly, the case is made out for enhancement of compensation.

¶60

For the foregoing discussion, the following:

¶61

ORDER

¶62

i) Appeal in MFA No.22088/2012 is allowed.

¶63

ii) Claimant is entitled for enhancement of compensation in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- as against sum of Rs.78,780/- granted by the tribunal with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization from the first respondent, who is the owner of the vehicle bearing No.KA-48/5277.

¶64

iii) Appeal in MFA No.20475/2012 is allowed and liability fastened on the insurance company is set aside.

¶65

6 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:1845 MFA No. 22088 of 2012 C/W MFA No. 20475 of 2012

¶66

iv) Amount in deposit is ordered to be returned

¶67

to the insurance company.

¶68

v) Four weeks time is granted to the owner of the offending vehicle to deposit the adjudged compensation.

¶69

vi) No orders as to costs.

¶70

Sd/JUDGE

¶71

HMB

¶72

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 47

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

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 P. Mustahanbi W/O. Hussainasab

Venkatesh Hanumantappa Waddar @ Bhovi Vs the Divisional Manager

The Manager Vs Gururaj Baburay Pai