Insurance appeal against a motor accident award where the Tribunal directed pay and recover despite holding the rider was uninsured of a valid driving licence. The High Court held this was a fundamental breach of policy conditions, exonerated the insurer, and fastened liability on the vehicle owner.
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:12764 MFA No. 2833 of 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.2833 OF 2014 (MV)
BETWEEN:
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., PUTTUR BRANCH, THROUGH ITS REGIONAL OFFICE, KRISHI BHAVAN BUILDING, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE-560 009. REP. BY SMT. P.NAVAMANY MANAGER.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. ANUP SEETHARAM RAO., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. B.C. SEETHARAM RAO., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by THEJASKUMAR N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
(RIDER OF MOTOR CYCLE NO.KA.12-H-1274).
NC: 2024:KHC:12764 MFA No. 2833 of 2014
(OWNER OF MOTOR CYCLE NO.KA.12-H-1274).
…RESPONDENTS
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:20.01.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO. 1114/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, BELTHANGADY.
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Sri.Anup Seetha Rama Rao., learned counsel on behalf of Sri.Seetha Rama Rao.B.C., for the appellant and Sri.Somesh., learned counsel on behalf of Sri.Rajaram.S., for respondent No.2 have appeared in person.
There is no representation on behalf of respondent No.3, either personally or through video conferencing.
NC: 2024:KHC:12764 MFA No. 2833 of 2014
respondent No.1 is served and unrepresented. Respondent No.1 has neither engaged the services of an advocate nor conducted the case as party in person.
referred to as per their status and ranking before the Tribunal.
4. The brief facts are these:
On the 30th day of August 2009 at about 12:30 p.m., the claimant was walking by the side of the road near Peraje, Peraje Village, Madikeri Taluk in Sullia Sampaje road, meanwhile one motorcycle bearing Reg. No.KA-12-H-1274 came from Sullia side in a rash and negligent manner and hit him. Due to the impact, the claimant sustained grievous injuries. Immediately, he was taken to Community Health Centre, Sullia and was given first aid treatment. Thereafter, he was shifted to Wenlock Hospital, Mangalore and was admitted as an inpatient from 30.08.2009 to 20.09.2009. Contending that he is entitled for compensation, the claimant filed claim petition.
In response to the notice, respondents 1 and 2 did not appear and they placed ex-parte. The third respondent
appeared through its counsel and filed written statement denying the petition averments. It specifically contended that the rider of the motorcycle was not having valid and effective driving license to ride the motorcycle as on the date of the accident. Among other grounds, it prayed for dismissal of the Claim Petition.
Based on the above pleadings, the Tribunal framed issues, parties led evidence and marked the documents. The Tribunal vide Judgment dated:20.01.2014 partly allowed the Claim Petition. The Insurance Company has assailed the Judgment of the Tribunal in this appeal on several grounds as set-out in the Memorandum of appeal.
Next, he submits that the reasoning and finding of the Tribunal on liability is very cryptic besides being erroneous.
A further submission is made that the Tribunal grossly erred in directing the Insurance Company to pay and recover the same from the owner of the offending vehicle.
NC: 2024:KHC:12764 MFA No. 2833 of 2014
Lastly, he submits that viewed from any angle, the Judgment of the Tribunal is untenable. Counsel therefore, submits that the appeal may be allowed.
Heard, the contentions urged on behalf of the appellant and perused the appeal papers and also the records with utmost care.
It is pivotal to note that the Insurance Company specifically contended that the rider of the motorcycle had no driving license as on the date of the accident. Though the Tribunal has concluded that the rider of the motor cycle was
not having valid driving license as on the date of accident, the Tribunal erred in fastening the liability on the Insurance
NC: 2024:KHC:12764 MFA No. 2833 of 2014
Company to pay the compensation and recover the same from the owner of the offending vehicle.
Perused the Judgment with utmost care. The division bench of this Court has held that if the rider of a motorcycle is not having valid driving license as on the date of accident, the question of pay and recover does not arise. The second respondent - owner of vehicle neither contested the petition by filing written statement nor adduced evidence claiming that he did not consciously permit the rider K.H.Dayananda @ Daya to ride the vehicle. The rider K.H.Dayananda @ Daya rode the motorcycle without holding driving license. The said act of the rider of the motorcycle amounts to fundamental breach of policy condition within the meaning of Section 149(2)(a)(ii) of the Motor Vehicles Act. Hence, in my view, the Tribunal is not
justified in directing the Insurance Company to pay and recover.
In view of exoneration of the Insurance Company from its liability, the owner of the offending vehicle is directed to satisfy the award of the Tribunal.
NC: 2024:KHC:12764 MFA No. 2833 of 2014
The Registry concerned is directed to transmit the
amount in deposit to the Tribunal forthwith for refund of the
same to the Insurance Company.
Sd/JUDGE
MRP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 45
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Tribunal was justified in directing the Insurance Company to pay and recover compensation where the rider had no valid driving licence.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
MFA No.6154/2019 disposed of on 14.12.2023Relied on¶8
2 provisions across 1 enactments
United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Puttur Branch
Sri. Shivakumar @ Shiva S/o Balakrishna Shetty
Sri. K.H. Dayananda @ Daya S/o Honnappa Gowda
Sri. K.K. Seetharam S/o Krishnappa Gowda
Jyoti Mulimani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
