1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P. SANDESH
M.F.A.NO.8579/2017 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
NO.70/5, SUVARNA TOWERS, 1ST FLOOR,
NEAR VIJAYANAGAR BDA COMPLEX,
GOVINDARAJ NAGAR, VIJAYANAGAR,
BANGALORE-560 040.
REPRESENTED BY REGIONAL OFFICE:
NO.44/45, LEO SHOPPING COMPLEX,
RESIDENCY ROAD,
BANGALORE-560 025.
BY ITS DULY CONSTITUTED ATTORNEY.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI RAVISHANKAR C.R., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. MISS RAKSHITHA,
AGED ABOUT 14 YEARS,
D/O SRI MOHAN,
R/AT NO.86, CHANNARAYAPATNA,
MUDDANAHALLI, DANDIGANAHALLI,
HASSAN-573 225.
SINCE MINOR REPRESENTED BY
GUARDIAN SMT. H.T. SHASHIKALA.
2. SRI NAGAYYA,
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS,
S/O SRI RACHAYYA,
R/AT NO.213, 1ST FLOOR,
2
4TH CROSS, ABBIGERE,
CHIKKABANAWARA POST,
BANGALORE-560 090.
PERMANENT R/AT BUDINAL,
SHAHAPUR TALUK,
YADGIR DISTRICT.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SRINIVASA, ADVOCATE FOR R1,
NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH
VIDE ORDER DATED 22.11.2022)
THIS M.F.A IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 11.08.2017
PASSED IN MVC NO.367/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE XXI
ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND XIX ACMM, MEMBER-
MACT, BENGALURU C/C OF II ADDITIONAL JUDGE AND XXVIII
ACMM, MACT (SCCH-13), BENGALURU, AWARDING
COMPENSATION OF RS.4,43,420/- WITH INTEREST AT 6% P.A.
FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE DEPOSIT.
THIS M.F.A. COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for respondent No.1.
2. This appeal is filed challenging the judgment and award dated 11.08.2017, passed in M.V.C.No.367/2016, on the file of the XXI Additional Small Causes Judge and XIX ACMM, Member-MACT, Bengaluru ('the Tribunal' for short) questioning the liability fastened on the Insurance Company on the ground 3 that the driver was not having the LMV non-transport driving licence.
3. In view of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of MUKUND DEWANGAN v. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., reported in (2017) 14 SCC 663, if the driver is having the driving licence to drive the LMV, no need of transport endorsement and hence the judgment of the Tribunal does not require any modification and the liability fastened on the Insurance Company to pay to compensation will not vary in view of the judgment of the Apex Court referred (supra). Hence, the appeal is devoid of merits.
4. In view of the discussions made above, I pass the following:
ORDER
(i) The appeal is dismissed
(ii) The amount in deposit is ordered to be transmitted to the concerned Tribunal forthwith.
Sd/-
JUDGE MD