Shri.Maurti Narasing Jambotkar, Vs Vilas Vithalrao Patukale

SHRI MARUTI NARASING JAMBOTKAR, AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: WORKER IN HOTEL, NOW NIL, R/O: H.NO.407, SHANTA NIWAS, HOTELL UTSAV ROAD, CHANNAMMA NAGAR, BELAGAVI.

¶12

… APPELLANT

¶13

(BY SMT. GEETHA K.M. @ PAWAR, ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

VILAS VITHALRAO PATUKALE, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: 2965/2, KHADE BAZAR, BELAGAVI.

¶16

Digitally signed by MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶17

THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., D.O. MARUTI GALLI, BELAGAVI.

¶18

… RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SMT. PREETI SHASHANK, ADVOCATE FOR R2; R1-SERVED)

¶20

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 03.09.2015, PASSED IN MVC NO.1081/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE VI ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, BELAGAVI AND AWARD THE COMPENSATION AS PRAYED OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶21

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, JUDGMENT IS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶22

2 -

¶23

NC: 2025:KHC-D:8550 MFA No. 100579 of 2016

¶24

HC-KAR

¶25

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶26

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR)

¶27

This appeal is filed by the claimant under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, challenging the dismissal of the claim petition in MVC No.1081/2013 dated 03.09.2015 by the VI Additional District and Sessions Judge and Additional M.A.C.T., Belagavi (for short ‘the Tribunal).

¶28

The Tribunal dismissed the claim petition on the ground that the claimant had borrowed the motorcycle from the first respondent, who is its registered owner and sustained injuries while riding it. The Tribunal held that since the claimant was the borrower and had stepped into the shoes of the owner, the claim petition was not maintainable and accordingly dismissed it.

¶29

However, this issue is no longer res integra in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Sunil Kumar & Anr. reported in (2017) 13 SCC 199, wherein it has been held that even if the claimant had borrowed the vehicle and stepped into

¶30

3 -

¶31

NC: 2025:KHC-D:8550 MFA No. 100579 of 2016

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

the shoes of the owner, he would still be entitled to compensation under principle of no-fault liability under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act.

¶34

In the present case, the claim petition has been

¶35

filed under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, which is a special provision for compensation without proof of negligence. Therefore, the claimant is entitled to compensation on a no-fault liability basis.

¶36

Having regard to the nature of injuries, the claimant is entitled to Rs.5,000/- towards pain and suffering and maximum of Rs.15,000/- towards expenses. Hence, the claimant is entitled to total compensation of Rs.20,000/- from the owner and insurer of the motorcycle, as they are jointly and severally liable to pay the same.

¶37

In view of the judgment in United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Jagadish reported in (2018) 13 SCC 738, the insurer is liable to indemnify the owner and pay the awarded compensation. Accordingly, the owner and

¶38

4 -

¶39

NC: 2025:KHC-D:8550 MFA No. 100579 of 2016

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

insurer of the motorcycle are held jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation.

¶42

In the result, I proceed to pass the following:

¶43

ORDER

¶44

(i) The appeal is allowed.

¶45

(ii) The impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal is set aside. Consequently, the claim petition filed by the claimant is allowed in part.

¶46

(iii) The claimant is entitled to compensation of Rs.20,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization. The owner and insurer of the motorcycle are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation.

¶47