Hanumaiah Vs Nagendra Swamy R — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2026)

Hanumaiah Vs Nagendra Swamy R — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appeal partly allowed: Insurance Company to deposit Rs.2,79,100/- with interest within one month; claimant permitted to withdraw the entire deposited amount with accrued interest; Insurance Company at liberty to recover the same from the owner of the vehicle by due process of law.

Issue for consideration

Whether, given the alleged breach of policy conditions (fitness certificate of autorickshaw KA-02/A-5467 expired on the date of accident) and the insurer's objection under Section 149(2) MV Act, the insurer could be directed to pay the awarded compensation and thereafter recover it from the owner of the vehicle.

Court's answer

Since the vehicle lacked a valid fitness certificate as on the date of accident (an infraction/breach of policy conditions), the Court found it just and reasonable to invoke the principle of pay and recovery — the insurer to pay the compensation first and then recover it from the owner.

Ratio / Principle

The Insurance Company was directed to deposit Rs.2,79,100/- along with interest within one month from the date of the order; on such deposit, the claimant is permitted to withdraw the entire amount along with accrued interest.

Key takeaways

The Insurance Company is at liberty to recover the deposited amount from the owner of the vehicle by due process of law.ratio¶58

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — S.173(1) appeal by registered owner against MACT, Bengaluru award (MVC No.668/13, dated 02.09.2016) granting an injured claimant Rs.2,79,100/- with 9% p.a. interest for a 09.09.2012 autorickshaw (KA-02/A-5467) accident. Owner pleaded breach of policy conditions — the vehicle's fitness certificate had expired as on the date of accident — and the insurer objected to liability under S.149(2) MV Act, relying on a coordinate-bench decision in Malleshi v. Mrs.Hafiza Begum and Bajaja Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. (MFA CROB No.200013/2018 c/w MFA No.201596/2016, dated 06.11.2020), where non-possession of a valid fitness certificate was treated as an infraction warranting pay-and-recovery. Adopting that principle, the Court held pay-and-recovery just and reasonable: insurer to deposit Rs.2,79,100/- with interest within one month; claimant free to withdraw the entire deposit; insurer at liberty to recover from the owner by due process of law. Appeal partly allowed (P Sree Sudha, J.).

1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:35545 MFA No. 8341 of 2016

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF JULY, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 8341 OF 2016 (MV-I)

BETWEEN:

HANUMAIAH S/O LATE SANJEEVAIAH AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS R/AT NO 35, 51^ST CROSS, 4^TH BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU - 10 (RC OWNER OF VEHICLE KA- 02/A-5467)

…APPELLANT

(BY SRI. SHIVARAJ N ARALI., ADVOCATE)

AND:

NAGENDRA SWAMY R

Digitally signed by PADMASHREE SHEKHAR DESAI

Location: High Court of Karnataka

S/O LATE RAMACHANDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS R/AT NO 18, 1^ST MAIN, 4^TH CROSS, CHELUVAPPA GARDEN BHUVANESHWARA NAGAR K P AGRAHARA BENGALURU – 23.

UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED NO.1, 1^ST FLOOR, 3^RD CROSS, DWARAKANAGAR, 100 FEET RING ROAD(NEAR PESIT) HOSAKEREHALLI BENGALURU – 85.

2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:35545 MFA No. 8341 of 2016

HC-KAR

KRISHNA

S/O LATE MARIGOWDA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/AT NO 155/1, 4^TH CROSS, GANGONDANAHALLI BENGALURU - 39 (SUBSEQUENT PURCHASER OF THE VEHICLE NO KA-02-A-5467)

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. SHIVARAJ N. ARALI., ADVOCATE)

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 02.09.2016 PASSED IN MVC NO.668/13 ON THE FILE OF THE 13^TH ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSE JUDGE & MEMBER,MACT, BENGALURU, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.2,79,100/- WITH INTEREST AT 9% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION.

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA

ORAL JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the appellant/owner of the vehicle, filed under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 challenging the judgment and award dated 02.09.2016 passed in MVC No.668/13 on the file of the 13^th Additional Small Cause Judge & Member, MACT, Bengaluru, for enhancing the compensation.

Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for respondents. The

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:35545 MFA No. 8341 of 2016

HC-KAR

ranks of the parties are retained as per tribunal for the

sake of convenience.

Injured claimant met with an accident on 09.09.2012 and filed claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.20 lakhs. Tribunal considering the entire evidence on record granted an amount of Rs.2,79,100/-with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from date of petition till realisation.

Aggrieved by the said order, owner of the vehicle preferred appeal and mainly contended that there is breach of terms and conditions of the insurance policy. Autorikshaw bearing Reg.No.KA-02/A-5467 did not have fitness certificate and it is expired as on the date of accident. Insurance company took an objection regarding non existence of the fitness certificate and stated that they are not liable to pay the compensation as per Section 149(2) the MV Act. They relied upon the judgment passed

by the coordinate bench of this court dated 06.11.2020 in

MFA CROB No.200013/2018 C/w MFA

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:35545 MFA No. 8341 of 2016

HC-KAR

No.201596/2016 in case of Malleshi S/o

Devindrappa Maka Vs Mrs.Hafiza Begum and Bajaja

Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd., dated 06.11.2020

in which it was held as follows,

“21.XXX in the present case also the lorry bearing Reg.No.KA28/A- 5775 was not having valid fitness certificate as on the date of accident and certainly it can be said that it is an infraction but indisputably the said lorry is insured with the appellant/Insurance Company. Therefore, in view of this the appellant/Insurance Company shall pay first the compensation and satisfy the claim then recover it from the owner of the said lorry.”

Therefore this court finds that it is just and

reasonable to invoke the principle of pay and recovery.

Accordingly, this appeal is partly allowed.

Insurance Company is directed to deposit the amount

of Rs.2,79,100/- along with interest within 1 month from the date of this order.

NC: 2026:KHC:35545 MFA No. 8341 of 2016

5 -

HC-KAR

On such deposit, claimant is permitted to withdraw

the entire amount along with interest accrued on the

same.

However, Insurance Company is at liberty to recover

the same from owner of the vehicle by due process of law.

Sd/(P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE

AKV CT:NR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20