Karnataka High Court
The Manager vs R.Ramesh S/O.Late Siddappa on 5 November, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:15079
MFA No. 101651 of 2014
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101651 OF 2014 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
THE MANAGER,
ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL
INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,
2ND FLOOR, BESIDE MAYURA HOTEL,
DOUBLE ROAD, BELLARY,
NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS LEGAL MANAGER,
ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
2ND FLOOR, BELLAD BUILDING,
GOKUL ROAD, HUBLI.
...APPELLANT
(BY SMT. ANUSHA SANGAMI, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. S.K. KAYAKAMATH, ADVOCATE)
GIRIJA A.
BYAHATTI
AND:
Digitally signed by
GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
1. SHRI R. RAMESH S/O. LATE SIDDAPPA,
KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DHARWAD AGE: 32 YEARS,
OCC: HOTEL WORK,
R/O. KOTTUR VILLAGE,
TQ: KUDLIGI,
PRESENTLY RESIDING AT: WARD NO.18,
SHANKAR COLONY, 1ST MAIN ROAD,
BELLARY.
2. SHRI M. BASAVARAJA
S/O. RUDRAPPA M.,
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:15079
MFA No. 101651 of 2014
HC-KAR
AGE: 30 YEARS,
OCC: DRIVER OF TATA
INDICA VISTA,
R/O. HAGARI GAJAPURA VILLAGE,
TQ: HARAPANAHALLI,
DIST: DAVANAGERE.
3. SHRI KOTRESH MYDURU
S/O. HONNAGOUDA @ SHIVANNA,
AGE: 30 YEARS,
OCC: OWNER OF TATA INDICA VISTA CAR,
R/O. NEAR BANASHANKARI TEMPLE,
6TH WARD, KOTTUR TOWN,
TQ: KUDLIGI, DIST: BELLARY.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. T. BASAVANA GOUD, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3;
R1-NOTICE HELD SUFFICIENT)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE
MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE
RECORDS, HEAR THE PARTIES AND ALLOW THE APPEAL AS
PRAYED FOR BY SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED 29.03.2014 PASSED BY THE III MOTOR ACCIDENT
CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, BELLARY IN M.V.C. NO.845/2013, WITH
COST IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:15079
MFA No. 101651 of 2014
HC-KAR
CORAM: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) Heard Miss.Anusha who appears through video conference and represents Sri.S.K.Kayakamath, learned counsel on record for the appellant. No representation on respondents' side on call.
2. This appeal is the outcome of the award that is passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-III, Bellary (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal' for brevity) in M.V.C. No.845/2013 dated 29.03.2014.
3. The matrix of the case as projected by respondent No.1 (hereinafter referred to as 'the claimant' for the sake of convenience of discussion) is that on 22.05.2011 while himself and his relative were proceeding on a motorcycle and when they reached near Basavanal Village, a car bearing registration No.KA-35/M-8115 came -4- NC: 2025:KHC-D:15079 MFA No. 101651 of 2014 HC-KAR in the opposite direction driven by its driver at a high speed in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against their vehicle due to which himself and his relative fell down and he sustained injuries. The Tribunal, subjecting the evidence of PW-1, PW-2, RW-1, Exs.P.1 to P.12 and Ex.R.1 to scrutiny came to a conclusion that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the car in question. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.2,05,600/- as compensation fastening liability upon the appellant herein.
4. Arguing on the merits of the matter, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the claimant lodged a complaint to Police with delay of 24 days. There is collusion between the claimant and the owner of the car. Without appreciating the same, the Tribunal fastened liability upon the appellant and thus the present appeal is filed.
5. As per the version of the claimant, the accident occurred on 22.05.2011. The contents of Ex.P.4-Wound Certificate reveal that on the same day he was admitted at -5- NC: 2025:KHC-D:15079 MFA No. 101651 of 2014 HC-KAR Government Hospital, Kottur and from there he was shifted to Davangere Hospital. The evidence of PW-2 makes it clear that the claimant sustained fracture of right tibia and underwent operation also. As per the contents of Ex.P.4- Wound Certificate, the claimant took treatment as inpatient for a period of 5 days. The claimant thereby established that he sustained grievous injury in a road traffic accident, took treatment as inpatient and during the course of treatment he underwent a surgery also. The claimant also established that basing on the contents of Ex.P.2- Complaint, a case was registered by Police, investigated into and filed charge sheet against the driver of the car. No material whatsoever is on record to show that the claimant having colluded with the owner of the car which is involved in the accident has laid a false claim. Only because there is some delay in giving complaint to Police, an adverse inference against the claimant cannot be drawn. This Court in the judgment rendered in MFA No.103215/2014 disposed of on 29.10.2025 at para No.8 held as under: -6-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:15079 MFA No. 101651 of 2014 HC-KAR "8. One should remember that law has not fixed any time limit for lodging complaint to police.
Whether delay in setting the law into motion is fatal or not depends upon the facts and circumstances of each case. Courts have to look whether the de facto complainant has utilized the time to give wings to his imagination, to wreck vengeance against his opponents, for discussions and deliberations, to settle scores or to prepare grounds for false claim. In case none of these exist and where the delay is due to genuine cause coupled sometimes with inability to approach police immediately, then such delay cannot come in the way of victim to get justice."
6. Having considered the fact that the claimant succeeded in establishing that he approached hospital for treatment immediately after the accident, that he sustained grievous injury and got operated during the course of treatment, this Court is of the view that the delay in lodging complaint cannot be held to be fatal so as to reject the claim of the claimant. Hence, ultimately this Court holds that there are no merits in the appeal.
7. Resultantly the following:
-7-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:15079 MFA No. 101651 of 2014 HC-KAR ORDER
(i) The appeal stands dismissed.
(ii) Amount if any in deposit, be transmitted to the concerned Tribunal immediately.
Sd/-
(CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE RH CT-MCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26