Allowed¶48

National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Sri Shulapani S K

Karnataka HC9 Jun 2026MFA/5173/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka HC, MFA No. 5173 of 2014 (MV-I), Justice P Sree Sudha, decided 09-06-2026 — insurer's appeal under S.173(1) MV Act against MACT award in MVC No.316/2008 (Rs.2,97,500 + 6% interest) to a pillion-rider claimant; negligence finding resting only on charge sheet against rider of motorcycle KA-50-E-6067 held patently erroneous; conflicting hospital records on offending vehicle (auto vs motorcycle vs four-wheeler); rider's own claim MVC 204/2008 earlier dismissed; appeal allowed, award set aside, deposit refunded and transmitted to M.A.C.T.

What did the court decide?

Appeal allowed; order of the Tribunal in MVC No.316/2008 dated 16.04.2014 set aside; the amount deposited by the Insurance Company before this Court to be refunded and transmitted to the M.A.C.T. ¶48

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Sri Shulapani S K — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appeal allowed; order of the Tribunal in MVC No.316/2008 dated 16.04.2014 set aside; the amount deposited by the Insurance Company before this Court to be refunded and transmitted to the M.A.C.T.

¶48

Issue for consideration

Whether the Tribunal's finding in MVC No.316/2008 that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the rider of motorcycle bearing KA-50-E-6067, based solely on the charge sheet and without examining other aspects (including inconsistent descriptions of the offending vehicle in the medical records), is patently erroneous and whether the award is liable to be set aside.

¶42

Court's answer

The Tribunal simply considered that a charge sheet was filed against the rider of motorcycle KA-50-E-6067 and held the accident occurred due to his negligence, without going into the other aspects; this Court finds that finding of the Tribunal patently erroneous and liable to be set aside.

¶42

Ratio / Principle

The appeal is allowed and the order of the Tribunal in MVC No.316/2008 dated 16.04.2014 is set aside.

¶49

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Motor Vehicles Act, S.173(1) — Miscellaneous First Appeal by National Insurance Co. Ltd. against the MACT award in MVC No.316/2008 (dt. 16.04.2014, 5th Addl. Small Causes Judge/24th ACMM/MACT, Bangalore) granting Rs.2,97,500 with 6% interest to a pillion-rider claimant injured on 08.10.2007. The Tribunal had attributed the accident to the rider of motorcycle KA-50-E-6067 solely because a charge sheet stood filed against him. The Court noted that the rider (a police constable) had himself filed MVC No.204/2008, which the Tribunal dismissed, and that the hospital records described the offending vehicle inconsistently (fall from two-wheeler; motorcycle dashing an auto; two-wheeler meeting with a four-wheeler). Holding the Tribunal's finding, reached 'without going into the other aspects', patently erroneous, the Court allowed the appeal, set aside the award dated 16.04.2014, and directed that the insurer's deposit be refunded and transmitted to the M.A.C.T.

¶1

1 - NC: 2026:KHC:27676 MFA No. 5173 of 2014

¶2

HC-KAR

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 5173 OF 2014 (MV-I)

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, DO-II SATHYA COMPLEX, MISSION ROAD, BANGALORE-01.

¶7

THROUGH ITS REGIONAL OFFICE, NO.144, SUBHARAM COMPLEX, M.G.ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001, REP. BY IT'S ASST. MANAGER.

¶8

…APPELLANT

¶9

(BY SRI. SEETHARAMA RAO B.C, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by PADMASHREE SHEKHAR DESAI Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶12

SRI. SHULAPANI S.K, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, S/O KADIRAPPA, RESIDENT OF SHIVARA PATNA, MALUR TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 130.

¶13

OR RESIDING AT C/O NEAR BEL, VIDYANAGAR MAIN ROAD, BANGALORE.

¶14

SRI. JAYAKUMAR MAJOR,

¶15

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:27676 MFA No. 5173 of 2014

¶16

HC-KAR

¶17

S/O GOVINDA RAO, NEAR: AYYAPPA TEMPLE, NO.411, JAKKUR LAYOUT, YELAHANKA, BANGALORE - 64. (OWNER OF MOTOR CYCLE NO.KA-50-E-6067)

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(R1 AND R2 ARE SERVED BUT UNREPRESENTED)

¶20

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 16.4.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.316/2008 ON THE FILE OF THE 5TH ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE, 24TH ACMM, MEMBER, MACT, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BANGALORE, AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF RS.2,97,500/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% P.A FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE DATE OF ITS REALIZATION.

¶21

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

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA

¶23

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶24

This appeal is filed by the Insurance Company against the award of the Tribunal in MVC No. 316 of 2008 dated 16.04.2014. Injured claimant met with an accident on 08.10.2007 and filed claim petition claiming compensation of ₹6,00,000/-. Tribunal considering the

¶25

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:27676 MFA No. 5173 of 2014

¶26

HC-KAR

¶27

entire evidence on record granted an amount of ₹2,97,500/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation. Aggrieved by the said order, Insurance Company preferred this appeal and mainly contented that the Tribunal held that accident occurred due to negligence of driver of motorcycle KA-50E-6067.

¶28

2. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company submits that initially the claim petition filed by the petitioner herein was dismissed on 14.08.2008 but without any evidence and against which, they preferred MFA No. 645/2009 and the matter was remanded. But the Tribunal without considering any fresh evidence or additional material on record has granted compensation and it was held that claim petition filed by rider of the vehicle/police constable was dismissed by the Tribunal. The complaint was given 17 days after the accident. In the medical records it is stated that the auto rickshaw dashed the motorcycle on which the claimant was a pillion rider. Then

¶29

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:27676 MFA No. 5173 of 2014

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

he was shifted to Hosmat Hospital and in the history it was

¶32

stated that there was involvement of an auto. But the rider of the motorcycle being a police constable manipulated the records and implicated the motorcycle KA-50-E-6067 which is an insured vehicle in the place of auto. And the rider of the motorcycle was got examined by the pillion rider as an independent witness. Therefore, requested to set aside the order.

¶33

3. They also filed I.A. No. 1 of 2014 and filed the relevant documents i.e., C.C. of the judgment in MVC.204/2008, Copy of Accident Register Extract of Bowring Hospital, Accident and Trauma Chart of Hosmat Hospital of 1^st respondent and Accident and Trauma Chart of Venkatesh Murthy and it was allowed and the said documents are received in evidence on 31.07.2014 itself. The registry also recorded the evidence on behalf of the appellant. The manner of accident as per the claimant is that while he was traveling as a pillion rider along with the

¶34

rider of the vehicle(police constable) on motorcycle

¶35

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:27676 MFA No. 5173 of 2014

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

bearing number KA-01-Y-6230, the rider of another motorcycle bearing KA-50-E-6067 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed them. As a result, they fell down and sustained injuries. The rider of the vehicle and the pillion rider filed different cases before different Tribunals and the MVC 204/2008 filed by rider of the vehicle was dismissed on 18.06.2011 but the claim petition filed by pillion rider was allowed and decreed in his favour and compensation was also granted.

¶38

4. The Insurance company collected the relevant documents and filed this appeal and they mainly contended that as the rider of the vehicle is a police constable he manipulated the records and implicated another motorcycle bearing number KA-50–E-6067 to gain wrongfully. They stated that as per the copy of the Accident Register Extract of the Bowring and Lady-Curzon Hospital, it was mentioned that there was a fall from two wheeler and in Accident And Trauma Chart of Hosmat Hospital it was mentioned that their motorcycle dashed

¶39

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:27676 MFA No. 5173 of 2014

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

the auto and even in Accident And Trauma Chart of rider of the vehicle it was stated that their motorcycle dashed the auto. In the Discharge Summary it was mentioned that two wheeler met with an accident with a four wheeler and thus, there are the glaring discrepancies regarding the description of the offending vehicle itself. The Tribunal has rightly considered all the aspects and dismissed MVC 204/2008 filed by rider of the vehicle.

¶42

5. But the pillion rider filed the claim petition before another M.A.C.T. without bringing all the facts to the notice of the Tribunal. When the Tribunal Simply considered that charge sheet is filed against the rider of the motorcycle bearing KA-50-E-6067 and held that the accident occurred only due to the negligence of the said rider of the vehicle, without going into the other aspects. Therefore, this Court finds that the finding of the Tribunal is patently erroneous and is liable to be set aside.

¶43

6. In the result, the following:

¶44

¶45

NC: 2026:KHC:27676 MFA No. 5173 of 2014

¶46

HC-KAR

¶47

ORDER

¶48