Shanamukappa Vs Ninganagouda

¶1

1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:12580 MFA No. 100902 of 2015

¶2

HC-KAR

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 100902 OF 2015 (MV-)

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

SHANAMUKAPPA S/O. SHIVAPPA ULLAGADDI, AGE: 43 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, (OWNER OF VEHICLE BEARING NO.KA-26/T-8658) R/O: MENASSAGI, TALUK: RON,DIST: GADAG.

¶7

…APPELLANT

¶8

(BY SRI. RAJENDRA R. PATIL, ADVOCATE)

¶9

AND:

¶10

MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR

¶11

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

SRI. NINGANAGOUDA S/O. MAHADEVAGOUDA KYAMANAGOUDA, AGE: 43 YEARS, OCC: NIL, R/O: MENASSAGI, TALUK: RON, DIST: GADAG.

¶13

SHRI. NINGAPPA S/O. BASAPPA TOTAR AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER OF TRACTOR, R/O: MENASSAGI, TAL: RON,DIST: GADAG.

¶14

THE MANAGER NEW INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., OFFICE AT NEAR ROTARY CIRCLE, P.B. ROAD, GADAG.

¶15

THE MANAGER UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, TONTDARYA VIDYAPEETHA BUILDING,

¶16

2 -

¶17

NC: 2025:KHC-D:12580 MFA No. 100902 of 2015

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

ROTARY CIRCLE, P.B.ROAD, GADAG.

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SRI. H.N. GULARADDI, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. R.R. MANE, ADVOCATE FOR R3 AND R4)

¶22

THIS MFA FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, 1988, PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 30.08.2014 PASSED BY THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND MACT, GADAG, IN MVC NO.24/2012, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

¶23

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

¶24

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI

¶25

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶26

This Appeal is filed by the owner of the vehicle, challenging the judgment and award dated 30.08.2014 passed in MVC No.24/2012 by the Additional District and Sessions Judge and MACT, Gadag ( 'the Tribunal' for short).

¶27

Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this appeal are as follows:

¶28

2.1. On 18.08.2011 at 01:00 p.m., the deceased Mahadevagouda was proceeding to his land to attend the

¶29

3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:12580 MFA No. 100902 of 2015

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

agricultural work at Menasigi Village. At that time, the driver of the tractor bearing Reg.No.KA-26/T-8658 was taking his tractor in reverse in a rash and negligent manner and dashed to the deceased in front of the house of Ashok Choukimath. As a result, the deceased sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the injuries on spot. The petitioner, being the legal representative of the deceased, filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking compensation for the death of the deceased in a road traffic accident. Accordingly, prays to allow the claim petition.

¶32

The owner/appellant herein, filed a statement of objections denying the averments made in the claim petition and contended that the driver of the offending vehicle possessed a valid and effective driving license as of the date of the accident and contended that the vehicle was insured with the United India Insurance Company Ltd. Accordingly, prays to dismiss the claim petition against the

¶33

owner.

¶34

4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:12580 MFA No. 100902 of 2015

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

The driver of the offending vehicle though,

¶37

appeared through counsel, did not file his statement of objections.

¶38

New India Insurance Company Ltd. filed a statement of objections denying the averments made in the claim petition and contended that the offending vehicle was not insured with them and that the driver of the offending vehicle did not possess a valid and effective driving license. Therefore, prays to dismiss the claim petition against the New India Insurance Company Ltd.

¶39

The Tribunal, based on the pleadings of the parties, framed the relevant issues.

¶40

The petitioner, to substantiate his case, examined himself as PW-1 and marked 5 documents as Exs.P1 to P5. Conversely, the respondents, i.e, the owner and the insurance company, have not led any oral or documentary evidence.

¶41

5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:12580 MFA No. 100902 of 2015

¶42

HC-KAR

¶43

After considering the verbal and documentary evidence, the Tribunal allowed the claim petition in part vide judgment dated 30.08.2014 and awarded a global compensation of Rs.1,40,000/- with 6% interest p.a. from the date of the petition till the deposit of the award amount and dismissed the claim petition against the driver of the tractor and the New India Insurance Company Ltd. and directed the owner of the tractor and trailer to deposit the compensation amount.

¶44

The owner, being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 30.08.2014 passed in MVC No.24/2012, filed this appeal.

¶45

Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the owner and also the learned counsel for the Insurance Company.

¶46

The learned counsel for the owner submits that, the offending vehicle was insured with United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and not with New India Insurance Co.

¶47

6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:12580 MFA No. 100902 of 2015

¶48

HC-KAR

¶49

Ltd. He submits that, during the pendency of this appeal, an application was filed to implead United India Insurance Co. Ltd. as respondent No.4. This court allowed the application vide order dated 10.12.2018. He submits that, as of the date of the accident, the vehicle was insured with United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and the driver possessed a valid and effective driving license. In support of his contention, he has produced the insurance policy, which discloses that the said vehicle was insured with United India Insurance Co. Ltd. from 26.10.2010 to midnight on 25.10.2011. Hence, he submits that the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal may be set aside and the matter may be remitted to the Tribunal. Accordingly, prays to allow the appeal.

¶50

Learned counsel Sri. R.R.Mane, appearing for the Insurance Companies i.e., respondents No.3 and respondent No.4 herein, fairly concedes that the said vehicle was insured with United India Insurance Co. Ltd. as of the date of the accident and submits that the matter be

¶51

7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:12580 MFA No. 100902 of 2015

¶52

HC-KAR

¶53

remitted to the Tribunal for fresh consideration. Accordingly, prays to dispose of the appeal.

¶54

Perused the records and considered the

¶55

submissions of the learned counsel for the parties.

¶56

The point that would arise for consideration is regarding the liability.

¶57

There is no dispute regarding the occurrence of the accident and the injury sustained by the petitioner in a road traffic accident. The petitioner has produced a certified copy of a charge sheet marked as Ex.P3, which discloses that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle. Although the said vehicle was insured with United India Insurance Co. Ltd., the petitioner, without knowing that the vehicle was insured with United India Insurance Co. Ltd., arrayed New India Insurance Co. Ltd. as respondent No.3 in the claim petition. In fact, the said vehicle was not insured with New India Insurance Co. Ltd. as of the date of the accident. The

¶58

8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:12580 MFA No. 100902 of 2015

¶59

HC-KAR

¶60

owner has produced a copy of the insurance policy. The insurance period was valid from 26.10.2010 to midnight on 25.10.2011, and admittedly the acciden t was o ccurred on 18.08.2011. As of the date of the accident, the said vehicle was insured with United India Insurance Co. Ltd. The Tribunal has dismissed the claim petition against the driver and New India Insurance Co. Ltd. solely on the ground that the vehicle was not insured with the said company. In view of the production of a copy of the insurance policy, the matter requires re-consideration by the Tribunal. In view of the same, the point is answered accordingly.

¶61

In view of the above discussion, I proceed to

¶62

pass the following order:

¶63

ORDER

¶64

i. The Appeal is allowed ;

¶65

ii. The judgment and award dated 30.08.2014 passed in MVC No.24/2012 by the Tribunal is hereby set aside;

¶66

9 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:12580 MFA No. 100902 of 2015

¶67

HC-KAR

¶68

iii. The Claim petition in MVC No.24/2012 is remitted to the tribunal for reconsideration and restored to its original file;

¶69

iv. The petitioner is permitted to implead United India Insurance Co. Ltd. as respondent No.4;

¶70

v. The Tribunal, thereafter, to permit the parties to lead further evidence, if any. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. is at liberty to file a statement of objections/written statement if so advised within 15 days from the date of appearance, and thereafter, the Tribunal to pass appropriate judgment in accordance with law;

¶71