Dismissed¶36

The Divisional Manager National v. Kashavva W/O Suresh Alias

Karnataka HC17 Jul 2025MFA/21546/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

National Insurance Company Ltd. appeal dismissed; MFA No. 21546 of 2012 (MV-D); NC: 2025:KHC-D:8911; MVC No.138/2009, III Addl. Senior Civil Judge & MACT Dharwad; award dated 30.11.2011; Section 173(1) MV Act; engine/chassis number mismatch with insurance policy; false implication rejected; registration number identical; motorcycle KA-25/X-9586; hit and run case; fatal accident; Hanchate Sanjeevkumar, J.; 17-07-2025; deposit transmitted to Tribunal.

What did the court decide?

No relief to the appellant-insurer; the amount in deposit, if any, directed to be transmitted to the Tribunal forthwith. ¶36

The Divisional Manager National Vs Kashavva W/O… — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No relief to the appellant-insurer; the amount in deposit, if any, directed to be transmitted to the Tribunal forthwith.

¶36

Issue for consideration

Whether the difference between the engine number and chassis number found on the motorcycle and the corresponding details in the insurance policy constituted sufficient ground to conclude that the motorcycle was falsely implicated, so as to overturn the Tribunal's finding fastening liability on the insurer to pay compensation.

¶28

Court's answer

The discrepancy between the chassis number of the motorcycle and the details in the insurance policy cannot constitute sufficient ground to claim false implication; admittedly, the registration number is identical to that mentioned in the insurance policy.

¶35

Ratio / Principle

The mismatch of engine/chassis numbers alone does not justify the conclusion that the motorcycle was falsely implicated; the Tribunal was correct in determining that motorcycle bearing No. KA-25/X-9586 was involved in the accident which resulted in the death of the deceased, and there is no substantive basis to believe the motorcycle was falsely implicated.

¶35

Key takeaways

There are no valid grounds to interfere with the findings of the Tribunal.ratio¶36

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

MFA (MV-D) under S.173(1) MV Act — insurer's appeal against judgment and award dated 30.11.2011 in MVC No.138/2009, III Addl. Senior Civil Judge & MACT, Dharwad, fastening on it liability to pay compensation — ground urged: engine number and chassis number on the motorcycle differ from the insurance policy details, suggesting false implication — registration number identical to that in the policy — discrepancy in chassis number alone held insufficient to claim false implication — Tribunal upheld as correct in determining that motorcycle bearing No. KA-25/X-9586 was involved in the fatal accident — no valid grounds to interfere with the Tribunal's findings — appeal dismissed in its entirety as devoid of merit; amount in deposit, if any, to be transmitted to the Tribunal forthwith. (High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench; Hanchate Sanjeevkumar, J.; 17.07.2025.)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC-D:8911 MFA No. 21546 of 2012

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,

¶5

DHARWAD BENCH

¶6

DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF JULY, 2025

¶7

BEFORE

¶8

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

¶9

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 21546 OF 2012 (MV-D)

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., SUJATHA COMPLEX, OPPOSITE INDIRA GLASS HOUSE, HOSUR, HUBBALLI, (POLICY NO.602506/31/08/6200000050) NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS ADM. OFFICER, REGIONAL OFFICE, SUJATHA COMPLEX, P.B. ROAD, HUBBALLI.

¶12

… APPELLANT

¶13

(BY SRI. SURESH S. GUNDI, ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

KASHAVVA W/O SURESH @ SHIVARAJ MANE, AGE: 25 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE WIFE, R/O: NAVALUR, TQ: AND DIST: DHARWAD.

¶16

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

¶17

PARAVVA W/O MAHADEVAPPA MANE, SINCE RESPONDENT NO. 2 DIED ON 22/04/2012, THE RESPONDENT NO. 1 IS THE LR.S OF RESPONDENT NO.2 WHO IS ALREADY ON RECORD.

¶18

PUNDALIK S/O FAKIRAPPA TALWAR, AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: OWNER OF THE MOTOR CYCLE NO. KA-25/X-9586, R/O: NAVALUR CHAVANI, TQ: AND DIST: DHARWAD.

¶19

… RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHRIHARSH A. NEELOPANT, ADVOCATE FOR R3; SMT. SHAILA BELLIKATTI, ADVOCATE FOR R1; R1 IS THE LR’S OF DECEASED R2 AS PER DATED 06.01.2024)

¶20

¶21

NC: 2025:KHC-D:8911 MFA No. 21546 of 2012

¶22

HC-KAR

¶23

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 30-112011 PASSED IN M.V.C. NO.138/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND M.A.C.T., DHARWAD.

¶24

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

¶25

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶26

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

¶27

This Miscellaneous First Appeal is filed by the Insurance

¶28

Company challenging the judgment and award dated 30.11.2011 passed in MVC No.138/2009 on the file of III Additional Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Dharwad (for short, ‘the Tribunal’), questioning the liability fastened on it to pay compensation on the ground that engine number and chassis number found on the motorcycle are different in the insurance policy.

¶29

It is admitted that the engine number and chassis number found on the motorcycle are different in the insurance policy. This is the reason stated that the motorcycle is falsely implicated. But the registration number of motorcycle is same

¶30

as shown in the insurance policy. Initially the complaint is registered as hit and run case. As the rider of motorcycle hit

¶31

¶32

NC: 2025:KHC-D:8911 MFA No. 21546 of 2012

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

the deceased and ran away, quite naturally, crime was registered as hit and run case.

¶35

The discrepancy between the chassis number of the motorcycle and the details in the insurance policy cannot constitute sufficient ground to claim false implication. Admittedly, the registration number is identical to that mentioned in the insurance policy. This mismatch alone does not justify the conclusion that the motorcycle was falsely implicated. In view of this, the Tribunal was correct in determining that motorcycle bearing No. KA-25/X-9586 was involved in the accident, which resulted in the death of the deceased. There is no substantive basis to believe that the motorcycle was falsely implicated.

¶36