The Branch Manager v. Kumari Amrutha
Case brief
What is this about?
Insurer's MFA dismissed by Karnataka High Court (21.03.2025, Lalitha Kanneganti J.) in an injury claim where the defence rested on a vehicle-number discrepancy: eyewitness first reported KA-10-8991, police investigation fixed KA-22-M-6581 and charge-sheeted its driver unchallenged by the insurer. Key point for practitioners: burden of proving false implication of the insured vehicle lies on the Insurance Company and cannot be discharged by the initial FIR alone. Keywords: false implication of insured vehicle, FIR vehicle number change, charge sheet, burden of proof, Section 166 MV Act 1989, Section 173(1) MV Act, MVC No.27/2012 Kollegal, MFA No.7952 of 2016, Reliance General Insurance, KA-22-M-6581, KA-10-8991, NC: 2025:KHC:12009.
What did the court decide?
No relief to the appellant-insurer; the amount in deposit was directed to be transferred to the Tribunal forthwith, and the Registry was directed to return the Trial Court Records to the Tribunal with a certified copy of this Court's order.