Karnataka High Court
Aneesa vs Moulali And Ors on 5 September, 2024
Author: N.S.Sanjay Gowda
Bench: N.S.Sanjay Gowda
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:6705
MFA No. 202359 of 2017
C/W MFA No. 201156 of 2016
MFA No. 201157 of 2016
AND 1 OTHER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO. 202359 OF 2017 (MV-I)
C/W
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO. 201156 OF 2016(MV-I)
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO. 201157 OF 2016(MV-I)
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO. 202360 OF 2017(MV-I)
IN MFA NO.202359/2017:-
BETWEEN:
REHAN S/O AKEEL SHAIKH,
Digitally signed AGE: 12 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
by SUMITRA M/G BY AKEEL S/O HASHIMSAB SHIKH,
SHERIGAR
AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE,
Location: HIGH
COURT OF R/O. NEW VIDHI GURUKUL KUMBARI SOLAPUR
KARNATAKA NOW RESIDING AT SHAIKH COLONY,
VIJAYAPUR.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SANGANAGOUDA V. BIRADAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. MOULALI S/O CHANDSAB PATVEKAR,
AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS
R/O. 130 SAKHAR PETH,
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:6705
MFA No. 202359 of 2017
C/W MFA No. 201156 of 2016
MFA No. 201157 of 2016
AND 1 OTHER
SOLPAUR-413007.
2. THE BRANCH MANAGER
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
VIJAYAPUR-586101
3. NASIR SHAH S/O MOHAMMED TAMBOLI
AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS
R/O. YAVALI, TQ: MOHOL,
SOLAPUR-413007.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MANVENDRA REDDY, ADV FOR R2;
NOTICE TO R1 AND R3 ARE DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S. 173(1) OF MV ACT, PRAYING TO,
ALLOW THE APPEAL BY MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND
AWARD DATED 25.04.2016 PASSED BY THE MACT-IV,
VIJAYAPUR IN MVC NO.1105/2012 AND CONSEQUENTLY BE
PLEASED TO ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION FROM
RS.3,88,800/- TO RS.5,50,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 12% PER
ANNUM FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ACTUAL
REALIZATION AND ETC.
IN MFA NO.201156/2016:-
BETWEEN:
THE BRANCH MANAGER
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
SANGAM BUILDING 1ST FLOOR,
S.S. FRONT ROAD, VIJAYAPUR-586101
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. MANVENDRA REDDY, ADVOCATE)
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:6705
MFA No. 202359 of 2017
C/W MFA No. 201156 of 2016
MFA No. 201157 of 2016
AND 1 OTHER
AND:
1. REHAN S/O AKEEL SHAIKH,
AGE: 11 YEARS (MINOR),
UNDER GUARDIANSHIP OF HIS NATURAL FATHER
SRI. AKEEL S/O HASHIMSAB SHAIK,
R/O. NEW VIDHI GURUKUL KUMBARI, SOLAPUR
NOW RESIDING AT SHAIKH COLONY,
VIJAYAPUR.
2. MOULALI S/O CHANDSAB PATVEKAR,
AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS
R/O. 130, SAKHAR PETH, SOLPAUR-413007.
3. NASIR SHAH S/O MOHAMMED TAMBOLI
AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS
R/O. YAVALI, TQ: MOHOL,
DIST. SOLAPUR-413007.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SANGANAGOUDA V. BIRADAR, ADV FOR R1;
NOTICE TO R2 AND R3 ARE HELD SUFFICIENT)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S. 173(1) OF MV ACT, PRAYING TO,
CALL FOR THE RECORDS AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND
AWARD DATED 25.04.2016 PASSED BY THE MACT NO.IV,
VIJAYAPUR IN MVC NO.1105/2012 BY ALLOWING THE APPEAL
AS PRAYED FOR AND ETC.
IN MFA NO.201157/2016:-
BETWEEN:
THE BRANCH MANAGER
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
SANGAM BUILDING 1ST FLOOR,
S.S. FRONT ROAD,
VIJAYAPUR-586101
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. MANVENDRA REDDY, ADVOCATE)
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:6705
MFA No. 202359 of 2017
C/W MFA No. 201156 of 2016
MFA No. 201157 of 2016
AND 1 OTHER
AND:
1. ANEESA W/O AKEEL SHAIKH
AGED: 29 YEARS, OCC: TAILOR,
R/O. NEW VIHDI GURUKUL, KUMBARI,
SOLAPUR, NOW RESIDING
AT SHAIKH COLONY,
VIJAYAPURA-586101.
2. MOULALI S/O CHANDSAB PATVEKAR,
AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS
R/O. 130, SAKHAR PETH, SOLPAUR-413007.
3. NASIR SHAH S/O MOHAMMED TAMBOLI
AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS
R/O. YAVALI, TQ: MOHOL,
DIST. SOLAPUR-413007.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SANGANAGOUDA V. BIRADAR, ADV FOR R1;
NOTICE TO R2 AND R3 ARE HELD SUFFICIENT)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S. 173(1) OF MV ACT, PRAYING TO,
CALL FOR THE RECORDS AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND
AWARD DATED 25.04.2016 PASSED BY THE MACT NO.IV,
VIJAYAPUR IN MVC NO.1106/2012 BY ALLOWING THE APPEAL
AS PRAYED FOR AND ETC.
IN MFA NO.202360/2017:-
BETWEEN:
ANEESA W/O AKEEL SHAIKH
AGED: 30 YEARS, OCC: TAILOR,
R/O. NEW VIHDI GURUKUL, KUMBARI,
-5-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:6705
MFA No. 202359 of 2017
C/W MFA No. 201156 of 2016
MFA No. 201157 of 2016
AND 1 OTHER
SOLAPUR, NOW RESIDING AT
SHAIKH COLONY,
VIJAYAPURA-586101.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SANGANAGOUDA V. BIRADAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. MOULALI S/O CHANDSAB PATVEKAR,
AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS
R/O. 130 SAKHAR PETH, SOLPAUR-413007.
2. THE BRANCH MANAGER
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
VIJAYAPUR-586101
3. NASIR SHAH S/O MOHAMMED TAMBOLI
AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS
R/O. YAVALI, TQ: MOHOL, SOLAPUR-413007.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MANVENDRA REDDY, ADV FOR R2;
NOTICE TO R1 AND R3 ARE DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S. 173(1) OF MV ACT, PRAYING TO,
ALLOW THE APPEAL BY MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND
AWARD DATED 25.04.2016 PASSED BY THE MACT-IV,
VIJAYAPUR IN MVC NO.1106/2012 AND CONSEQUENTLY BE
PLEASED TO ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION FROM RS.10,000/-
TO RS.5,50,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 12% PER ANNUM FROM
THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ACTUAL REALIZATION AND ETC.
THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS
DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
-6-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:6705
MFA No. 202359 of 2017
C/W MFA No. 201156 of 2016
MFA No. 201157 of 2016
AND 1 OTHER
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA) The Insurer as well as the claimants are in appeal challenging the award passed by the Tribunal by which a sum of `3,88,800/- and a sum of `10,000/- is awarded to the claimants.
2. The Tribunal has recorded a finding that the evidence on record proved that the accident occurred due to the fault of the driver of the auto rickshaw bearing No.MH-13/AF-0457.
3. However, the dispute raised is that rickshaw Trolley bearing reg.No.MH-13/R-9096 was involved in the accident and not the auto bearing Reg.No.MH-13/AF-0457.
4. The case of the claimants was that they were travelling in the auto rickshaw bearing Reg.No.MH-13/AF- 0457. However, the claim of the owner was that according to the complaint lodged, the claimants were travelling in an auto Trolley bearing Reg.No.MH-13/R-9096 and -7- NC: 2024:KHC-K:6705 MFA No. 202359 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 201156 of 2016 MFA No. 201157 of 2016 AND 1 OTHER therefore the claimants could proceed only against the owner of auto Trolley bearing Reg.No.MH-13/R-9096. The Insurance Company also took-up the plea that the vehicle bearing No.MH-13/AF-0457 was not involved in the accident and the averments of the claimants that they are travelling in the said auto Trolley was incorrect. The Insurer also took-up the plea that the driver of the auto Trolley bearing Reg.No.MH-13/R-9096 was responsible for the accident and the claimants were required to go against the owner and driver of the said vehicle bearing No.MH- 13/R-9096 since they were travelling in that vehicle.
5. In the light of the stand taken by the owner and the Insurer and the contention advanced by the claimants, it is clear that there is a serious dispute as to the vehicle in which the claimants were travelling and the vehicle which was involved in the accident.
6. To compound this difficulty, an Insurance policy was produced of a car bearing Reg.No.MH-12/FA-5086 to contend that the vehicle was insured. Since the -8- NC: 2024:KHC-K:6705 MFA No. 202359 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 201156 of 2016 MFA No. 201157 of 2016 AND 1 OTHER fundamental question as to which vehicle was involved in the accident and whether it was insured or not has not been considered in the proper perspective, in my view, it would be appropriate to set aside the award passed by the Tribunal and remand the matter to the Tribunal with a direction to the Tribunal to first record a clear finding as to which was the vehicle, which was involved in the accident and whether the claimants were travelling in the said vehicle and whether the said vehicle was insured.
7. The parties, since being represented before this Court, are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 14.10.2024 and to take further instructions in the matter.
8. The amount in deposit shall be transferred and shall be disbursed in terms of the award that is likely to be passed.
9. The appeals filed by the Insurer e allowed and matter is remitted back to the Tribunal with the aforesaid directions.
-9-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:6705 MFA No. 202359 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 201156 of 2016 MFA No. 201157 of 2016 AND 1 OTHER
10. Since, the appeals filed by the Insurer are being allowed, the appeals fled by the claimants would not survive for consideration and they are reserved the right to make all their claims before the Tribunal afresh.
Sd/-
(N.S.SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE SN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12