Partly allowed

The Branch Manager v. Smt. Kalavathi

Karnataka HC11 Jun 2026MFA/9535/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Motor accident appeals arising from a common award in two MVCs: insurer contested liability on the ground the driver held only an LMV licence for a medium goods vehicle; claimants sought enhancement. Court enhanced compensation in both matters, applying pay-and-recovery against the owner due to licence mismatch.

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced from Rs.3,60,000 to Rs.8,44,400 and from Rs.7,65,600 to Rs.9,29,400; enhanced amounts of Rs.4,84,400 and Rs.1,63,800 with interest at 6% p.a.; insurer may recover from owner.

The Branch Manager Vs Smt. Kalavathi — Insurance | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

NC: 2026:KHC:28439 MFA No. 9536 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 9535 of 2015 MFA No. 7523 of 2017 AND 1 OTHER

¶2

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 11^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA

¶8

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 9536 OF 2015 (MV-D) C/W

¶9

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 9535 OF 2015 (MV-I) MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 7523 OF 2017 (MV-D) MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 7524 OF 2017 (MV-I)

¶10

IN MFA No. 9536/2015

¶11

BETWEEN:

¶12

THE BRANCH MANAGER RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., #3, 1^ST FLOOR, NORTH WING, MANANDI PLAZA, ST. MARKS ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶13

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

¶14

ALSO AT M/S. RELIANCE GENERAL INS. CO. LTD., NO.28, 5^TH FLOOR, CENTENARY BUILDING, M.G. ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001. NOW REPRESENTED BY MANAGER LEGAL. …APPELLANT

¶15

(BY SRI. ASHOK N. PATIL, ADVOCATE)

¶16

AND:

¶17

SMT. NAGAVELLI N. W/O. S. GOPINATH, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/AT 1^ST CROSS, MALLESHWARA NAGARA, ARASIKERE TOWN, HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 103.

¶18

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:28439 MFA No. 9536 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 9535 of 2015 MFA No. 7523 of 2017 AND 1 OTHER

HC-KAR

2. JAGADISH

S/O. CHANDRAPPA,

AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/O. GEEJIHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, ARASIKERE TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT,

¶23

PRESENTLY RESIDING AT: MADANAYAKANAHALLI SANGAM PAKERS & MORES, NELEMANGALA TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562 123.

¶24

SRI. RAFEEQ PASHA S/O. IMTIYAZ AHAMAD, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/O. BALLAR ALISHA COMPOUND, HIPPE, OPP: ANJANEYA SWAMY TEMPLE, ADEPETE, NELAMANGALA TOWN - 562 123.

¶25

…RESPONDENTS

¶26

(BY SRI. DAYANANDA S. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R1

¶27

VIDE ORDER DATED 15.02.2021, NOTICE TO R2 IS D/W R3 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

¶28

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED16.09.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.2025/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, ARSIKERE, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.3,60,000/- WITH INTEREST 8 P.A FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE DATE OF REALIZATION.

¶29

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:28439 MFA No. 9536 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 9535 of 2015 MFA No. 7523 of 2017 AND 1 OTHER

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

IN MFA NO. 9535/2015

¶32

BETWEEN:

¶33

THE BRANCH MANAGER RELINACE GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD # 3, 1^ST FLOOR, NORTH WING, MANANDI PLAZA, ST MARKS ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001

¶34

ALSO AT M/S RELAINACE GENERAL INS CO LTD NO.28, 5^TH FLOOR, CENTENARY BUILDING, M G ROAD, BENAGLURU - 560 001 NOW REPRESETNED BY MANAGER LEGAL

¶35

...APPELLANT

¶36

(BY SRI. ASHOK N. PATIL, ADVOCATE)

¶37

AND:

¶38

SMT. KALAVATHI W/O MURUGESH AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/O GEEJIHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, ARSIKERE TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 103

¶39

JAGADISH

¶40

S/O CHANDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/O GEEJIHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, ARSIKERE TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT

¶41

NC: 2026:KHC:28439 MFA No. 9536 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 9535 of 2015 MFA No. 7523 of 2017 AND 1 OTHER

¶42

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

PRESENTLY RESIDING AT: MADANAYAKANAHALLI SANGAM PAKERS & MORES, NELEMANGALA TALUK - 562 123, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT

¶45

SRI RAFEEQ PASHA S/O IMTIYAZ AHMAD AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/O BALLAR ALISHA COMPOUND, HIPPE, OPP :ANJANEYA SWAMY TEMPLE ADEPETE, NELAMANGALA TOWN - 562 123

¶46

...RESPONDENTS

¶47

(BY SRI. DAYANAND S. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R1

¶48

SRI. N. KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R3

¶49

R2 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

¶50

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED16.09.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.2026/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC, MACT, ARSIKERE, AWARDING THE COMPENSATION OF RS.7,65,600/- WITH INTEREST AT 8% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE DEPOSIT.

¶51

IN MFA NO. 7523/2017

¶52

BETWEEN:

¶53

SMT NAGAVELLI N W/O S GOPINATH R/O 1^ST CROSS, MALLESHWARA NAGARA ARSIKERE TOWN, HASSAN DISTRICT - 583 125

¶54

...APPELLANT

¶55

(BY SRI. DAYANAND S. PATIL, ADVOCATE)

¶56

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:28439 MFA No. 9536 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 9535 of 2015 MFA No. 7523 of 2017 AND 1 OTHER

¶57

HC-KAR

¶58

AND:

¶59

JAGADISH

¶60

S/O CHANDRAPPA R/O GEEJIHALLI VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI, ARSIKERE TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 112 PRESENTLY RESIDING AT MADANAYAKANAHALLI SANGAM PAKERS AND MORES NELAMANGALA TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 562 123

¶61

SRI RAFEEQ PASHA S/O IMTIYAZ AHAMAD R/O BALLAR ALISHA COMPOUND, HIPPE, OPP ANJANEYA SWAMY TEMPLE ADEPETE, NELAMANGALA TOWN, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 562 123 (OWNER OF EICHER BEARING REG NO.KA-52/6607)

¶62

THE BRANCH MANAGER RELINACE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., NO.3, 1^ST FLOOR, NORTH WING MANANDI PLAZA, ST. MARKS ROAD BENGALURU - 560 001

¶63

...RESPONDENTS

¶64

(BY SRI. N. KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2

¶65

SRI. ASHOK N. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R3 VIDE ORDER DATED 23.04.2026, NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH)

¶66

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:28439 MFA No. 9536 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 9535 of 2015 MFA No. 7523 of 2017 AND 1 OTHER

¶67

HC-KAR

¶68

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 16.09.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.2025/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, JMFC AND MACT, ARSIKERE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶69

IN MFA NO. 7524/2017

¶70

BETWEEN:

¶71

SMT KALAVATHI W/O MURUGESH AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS R/O GEEJIHALLI VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI, ARSIKERE TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 112

¶72

...APPELLANT

¶73

(BY SRI. DAYANAND S. PATIL, ADVOCATE)

¶74

AND:

¶75

JAGADISH

¶76

S/O CHANDRAPPA R/O GEEJIHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI ARSIKERE TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 112

¶77

PRESENTLY RESIDING AT MADANAYAKANAHALLI SANGAM PAKERS AND MORES NELAMANGALA TALUK BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 562 123

¶78

NC: 2026:KHC:28439 MFA No. 9536 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 9535 of 2015 MFA No. 7523 of 2017 AND 1 OTHER

¶79

¶80

HC-KAR

¶81

SRI RAFEEQ PASHA

¶82

AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS S/O IMTIYAZ AHAMAD R/O BALLAR ALISHA COMPOUND HIPPE, OPP: ANJANEYA SWMAY TEMPLE ADEPETE, NELAMANGALA TOWN BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 562 123

¶83

THE BRANCH MANAGER RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. NO.3, 1^ST FLOOR, NORTH WING MANANDI PLAZA, ST. MARKS ROAD BENGALURU - 560 001

¶84

...RESPONDENTS

¶85

(BY SRI. N. KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2

¶86

SRI. ASHOK N. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R3

¶87

VIDE ORDER DATED 23.04.2026,

¶88

NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH)

¶89

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED16.09.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.2026/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, & JMFC, MACT, ARSIKERE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶90

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

¶91

8 - NC: 2026:KHC:28439 MFA No. 9536 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 9535 of 2015 MFA No. 7523 of 2017 AND 1 OTHER

¶92

HC-KAR

¶93

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶94

These appeals are filed under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 challenging the common judgment and award dated 16.09.2015 passed in MVC.No.2025/2013 and MVC.No.2026/2013 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and Member MACT, Arasikere.

¶95

Heard the arguments of both sides. The ranks of

¶96

the parties are retained as per Tribunal for the sake of convenience.

¶97

Appeal in MFA.No.9536/2015 is filed challenging the judgment and award dated 16.09.2015 in MVC.No.2025/2013 and MFA.No.9535/2015 is filed challenging the judgment and award dated 16.09.2015 in MVC.No.2026/2013. Both appeals are filed by the Insurance Company and mainly contended that as per Complaint, FIR, Charge Sheet and IMV Report, vehicle involved in the accident is Medium Goods Vehicle i.e., Eicher Lorry. The driver of the offending vehicle was having driving licence to drive Light Motor Vehicle but the Tribunal assumed that the driver of the offending vehicle was having MGV Goods Vehicle licence and fastened the liability on the appellant-

¶98

NC: 2026:KHC:28439 MFA No. 9536 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 9535 of 2015 MFA No. 7523 of 2017 HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER

¶99

¶100

company. Further, the Tribunal failed to appreciate that the claimant himself produced the Xerox copy of the driving licence of the driver of the offending vehicle, marked as Ex.P11, which was only valid for LMV; LMV-GV; LMVCAB valid up to 19.03.2015 and there was no license for Medium Goods Vehicle. RW.1 stated that driver of the offending vehicle had no valid and effective driving license to drive the particular type of vehicle which is involved in the accident. Driver of the vehicle is having driving license to drive only Light Goods Vehicle but the vehicle involved in the accident is Medium Goods Vehicle. Therefore, there is clear violation of terms and conditions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, and the terms of the policy. The Tribunal erred in fastening the liability on the appellantcompany on the ground that Honnavalli Police Station has not charge sheeted the driver for an offence under Section 3 of the Motor Vehicles Act and thus requested the Court to set aside the order passed by the Tribunal.

¶101

MFA.No.7523/2017 is filed by the claimant

¶102

challenging the judgment and award dated 16.09.2015 passed in MVC.No.2025/2013, for enhancement of compensation.

¶103

NC: 2026:KHC:28439 MFA No. 9536 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 9535 of 2015 MFA No. 7523 of 2017 HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER

¶104

10 -

¶105

In this appeal, it is mainly contented that the Tribunal erred in taking the salary of the deceasedKasthuramma as Rs.5,000/- per month. The deceasedKasthuramma was getting a salary of Rs.300/- per day as per the evidence of PW.3-owner of Kalashree Granites. Due to accident, the petitioner has lost her mother and the compensation awarded under the heads ‘loss of estate, love and affection and funeral expenses' is on the lower side. Further, interest is to be granted at the rate of 18% and thus requested for modification of the order.

¶106

Petitioner herein stated that deceased-

¶107

Kasthuramma was doing work in Kalashree Granites and earning Rs.300/- per day, but she has not filed any income proof. As her mother met with an accident in the year 2013, this Court finds that it is just and reasonable to take her notional income as Rs.8,000/- per month as per the chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. The deceased was aged 54 years as on the date of accident and the relevant multiplier is '11' and she is entitled for 'future prospects' at 10% and 1/3^rd is to be deducted towards her

¶108

NC: 2026:KHC:28439 MFA No. 9536 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 9535 of 2015 MFA No. 7523 of 2017 AND 1 OTHER

¶109

11 -

¶110

HC-KAR

¶111

personal expenses. Thus, the 'loss of dependency' comes to Rs.7,74,400/- (8000+10% = 8800x12x11 = 1161600-1/3). Petitioner is entitled for an amount of Rs.40,000/- towards parental consortium and she is also entitled for Rs.30,000/under the conventional heads. Thus in all, compensation

¶112

awarded by this Court is as below:

¶113

Sl. Nos.	Particulars	Amount in Rs.
1	Loss of dependency	7,74,400/-
2	Parental consortium	40,000/-
3	Transportation of the dead body and funeral expenses	30,000/-
	Total	8,44,400/-

¶114

Thus, the compensation is enhanced from

¶115

Rs.3,60,000/- to Rs.8,44,400/- . Hence, the petitionerclaimant is entitled for enhanced compensation of Rs.4,84,400/- along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum.

¶116

Learned counsel for the respondent-insurance

¶117

company argued that the weight of the vehicle is 8,800 Kgs but the LMV driving licence is applicable only to the vehicle with a

¶118

NC: 2026:KHC:28439 MFA No. 9536 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 9535 of 2015 MFA No. 7523 of 2017 AND 1 OTHER

¶119

12 -

¶120

HC-KAR

¶121

weight of 7,500 Kgs. They relied upon a citation reported in

¶122

Bajaj Alliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Rambha

¶123

Devi & Ors (2025) 3 SCC 95 , in which it was held that the Insurance Company is liable for pay and recovery in case there is LMV driving licence. Therefore, the Insurance Company is at liberty to recover the amount from the owner of the vehicle by due process of law.

¶124

In the result, the following order is passed:

¶125

ORDER

¶126

i. Appeal is allowed in part ;

¶127

ii. The judgment and award dated 16.09.2015 in MVC.No.2025/2013 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and Member MACT, Arasikere, is modified;

¶128

iii. The appellant-claimant is entitled to a enhanced compensation of Rs.4,84,400/- along with interest at 6% p.a.

¶129

iv. The respondent-Insurance Company has already deposited 50% of the compensation amount before the Tribunal. They are directed to deposit the balance compensation amount along with interest at the rate of 6% per

¶130

NC: 2026:KHC:28439 MFA No. 9536 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 9535 of 2015 MFA No. 7523 of 2017 AND 1 OTHER

¶131

13 -

¶132

HC-KAR

¶133

annum within one month from the date of order. On such deposit, the petitioner is permitted to withdraw the entire amount along with interest accrued on it. Insurance Company is at liberty to recover the same from the owner of the vehicle by due process of law.

¶134

MFA.No.7524/2017 is filed against the award of the Tribunal in MVC.No.2026/2013 dated 16.09.2015. The injured claimant filed claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.15,00,000/- but the Tribunal considering the entire evidence on record granted an amount of Rs.7,65,560/- with interest at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of petition till its realisation. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner preferred this appeal mainly contending that the amount granted by the Tribunal under the other heads is on the lower side. The Tribunal ought to have granted amount under the 'future treatment'. Petitioner is a housewife, unable to care for her family and interest is to be granted at the rate of 18% per annum.

¶135

It is stated that petitioner was a housewife. Therefore this Court finds that it is just and reasonable to take

¶136

14 -

¶137

NC: 2026:KHC:28439 MFA No. 9536 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 9535 of 2015 MFA No. 7523 of 2017 HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER

¶138

her income as Rs.8,000/- per month as per the chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority as she met with an accident in the year 2013. She was aged 43 years and the relevant multiplier is '14'. Petitioner filed Ex.P5-wound certificate and also examined the Doctor. Due to accident, the petitioner sustained fracture of left sacral ala, fracture of ribs, grievous injuries on her forehead, fracture of thoracic vertebra and contusion over both lungs and underwent treatment for Bilateral Haemothorox inter costal dranage application procedure. Further, the petitioner was clinically examined by the Doctor and noticed that she was unable to stand, move and lift weight and loss the power of muscles. The Doctor assessed the permanent disability to an extent of 22% to the whole body. The Tribunal rightly considered the disability and taken the same as 22%. As the disability is more than 20% petitioner is entitled for 'future prospects' as per the citation reported in the case of New India Assurance Company Limited vs. Abdul S/o Mehaboob Tahasildar & Others in MFA.No.103835/2016 c/w 103807/2016 dated 27.05.2022 . Therefore, she is entitled for 25% towards

¶139

NC: 2026:KHC:28439 MFA No. 9536 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 9535 of 2015 MFA No. 7523 of 2017 AND 1 OTHER

¶140

15 -

¶141

HC-KAR

¶142

'future prospects'. So 'loss of future earning capacity' comes to Rs.3,69,600/- (8,000+25% x 12 x 14 x 22% = 3,69,600/-).

¶143

Petitioner has sustained various injuries. Considering the nature of injuries, her nature of work and other relevant factors, this Court finds that it is just and reasonable to grant an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- towards pain and sufferings and Rs.50,000/- towards 'loss of amenities' and Rs.30,000/for 'transportation, extra nourishment and attending charges'. The petitioner might not have attended any other work for a period of four months. Therefore, Rs.32,000/- is to be granted under the head 'loss of income during laid up period'. The Tribunal has already granted Rs.3,47,800/- towards medical expenses and the said amount is confirmed. Thus in all, compensation awarded by this Court is as below:

¶144

Sl. Nos.	Particulars	Amount in Rs.
1	Loss of future earning capacity	3,69,600/-
2	Medical expenses	3,47,800/-
3	Pain and Sufferings	1,00,000/-
4	Loss of amenities	50,000/-

¶145

NC: 2026:KHC:28439 MFA No. 9536 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 9535 of 2015 MFA No. 7523 of 2017 AND 1 OTHER

¶146

16 -

¶147

HC-KAR

¶148

5 Transportation, extra 30,000/-
nourishment and attending
charges
6 Loss of income during laid up 32,000/-
period
Total 9,29,400/-

¶149

Thus, the compensation is enhanced from

¶150

Rs.7,65,600/- to Rs.9,29,400/- . Hence, the petitionerclaimant is entitled for enhanced compensation of Rs.1,63,800/- along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum.

¶151

In the result, the following order is passed:

¶152

ORDER

¶153

i. Appeal is allowed in part ;

¶154

ii. The judgment and award dated 16.09.2015 in MVC.No.2026/2013 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and Member MACT, Arasikere, is modified;

¶155

iii. The appellant-claimant is entitled to a enhanced compensation of Rs.1,63,800/- along with interest at 6% p.a.

¶156

iv. The Insurance Company has already deposited 50% of the compensation amount before the

¶157

NC: 2026:KHC:28439 MFA No. 9536 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 9535 of 2015 MFA No. 7523 of 2017 AND 1 OTHER

¶158

17 -

¶159

HC-KAR

¶160

Tribunal. They are directed to deposit the balance compensation amount along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum within one month from the date of order. On such deposit, the petitioner is permitted to withdraw the entire amount along with interest accrued on it. Insurance Company is at liberty to recover the same from the owner of the vehicle by due process of law.

¶161

In view of the above, all appeals are

¶162

allowed in part .

¶163

Sd/(P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE

¶164

SMJ;

¶165

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 49

The Branch Manager v. Smt. Kalavathi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Branch Manager v. Smt. Kalavathi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Technopak Engineering Vs Sri L Mallikarjun

Sri Vijayakumar Vs the Managing Director

The Manager Vs Sri Sadiqulla

Shashidhar Vs Prajwal J

The Branch Manager Vs Smt. Nagavelli. N

Sri Vishwanatha Acharya Vs the Managing Director M/S Vrl Logistics Ltd.