Karnataka High Court
M/S National Insurance Company ... vs Jayasheela on 1 February, 2022
Bench: P.Krishna Bhat
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P. KRISHNA BHAT
MFA NO.2462/2011(MV)
BETWEEN:
M/S NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
REGIONAL OFFICE, NO.144,
SUBHARAM COMPLEX
M G ROAD,
BANGALORE,
NOW REP BY DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
M/S NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD,
DIVISIONAL OFFICE-III
SHRI LAKSHMI COMPLEX,
15-17-19, ST MARKSROAD,
BANGALORE-560001
... APPELLANT
(BY SRI. B C SHIVANNE GOWDA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. JAYASHEELA
W/O KUMAR B
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS
R/AT BORE WELL STREET
J C LAYOUT, MAJOR
BASAVESHWARANAGAR
KANAKAPURA TOWN-562117
2. SANTHOSH KUMAR
NO.11, GOVE MEDICAL COLLAGE QUARTERS
JLB CROSS ROAD
MYSORE-570006.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. S.V. SHASTRY, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
R2-SERVICE HELD SUFFICIENT)
2
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 02.09.2010 PASSED IN
MVC NO.6921/2008 ON THE FILE OF THE VI ADDITIONAL
JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MACT, BENGALURU,
AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF Rs.1,25,000/- WITH
INTEREST @ 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL
REALIZATION.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY,
THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE/ PHYSICAL HEARING, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This is an appeal at the instance of insurance company
calling in question the correctness of the judgment and award
dated 02.09.2010 passed in MVC No.6921/2008 by the VI
Addl. Judge, Court of Small Causes and MACT, Bengaluru City.
2. The claim petition proceeded on the allegation
that on 16.11.2007 at 2.45 p.m. when claimant was walking
on the extreme left side of the Pipeline Road near Manasa
School, Kanakapura Town, the motorcycle bearing registration
No.KA-09-EJ-7962 being driven in a rash and negligent
manner came and dashed against her and due to the same,
she suffered grievous injuries.
3. In the proceedings before the learned Claims
Tribunal, owner of the motorcycle respondent No.1 remained
exparte and insurance company filed its statement of
objections denying the material averments made in the claim
petition.
4. During the trial before the learned Tribunal,
claimant examined herself as PW1 and a doctor was examined
as PW2. Exs.P-1 to P-15 were marked on behalf of claimant.
Insurance company examined its official as RW1 and Exs.R-1
to R-4 were marked on behalf of respondents.
5. Upon hearing the learned counsel on both sides
and perusing the records learned Tribunal allowed the claim
petition in part and awarded compensation of Rs.1,25,000/-
with interest thereon at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till
realization with liability to pay the same by respondent No.2.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant-insurance
company submitted that this is a false case filed involving the
motorcycle insured by the appellant bearing registration
No.KA-09-EJ-7962 due to collusion between parties and
therefore, appeal is entitled to be allowed. In support of the
same, he draws my attention to various documents placed on
records and contends that even though case of the claimant is
that accident had taken place on 16.11.2007, the MLC
Register Extract - Ex.R-4 shows that history given was a fall
from motorcycle on 17.11.2007 and the injured was brought
to K C General Hospital by her husband and MLC register was
signed by her husband and the claimant had affixed her LTM
to the MLC register. He also submitted that complaint was
lodged only on 20.12.2007 nearly 34 days after the alleged
date of accident and claimant being an Advocate by
profession, it is very evident that documents were built up to
make out false case. He therefore prayed that appeal should
be allowed and claim petition should be dismissed.
7. Sri.S.V.Shastry, learned counsel for the claimant
is absent.
8. Since this is a very old appeal and the counsel for
claimant is absent, I have carefully perused the records and
considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for
the appellant. The averments made in claim petition as well
as facts stated in the complaint - Ex.P-2 by the claimant
clearly shows that claimant was a practicing Advocate in
Kanakapura. As per the claim petition as well as averments
made in the complaint (Ex.P-2) lodged on 20.12.2007 while
she was walking on the left side of the Pipeline Road near
Manasa School, Kanakapura Town, the motorcycle bearing
registration No.KA--09-EJ-7962 driven by its rider in a rash
and negligent manner had dashed against her and she had
fallen resulting in injuries to her left elbow, which suffered
fracture.
9. Ex.R-4 is the MLC register extract, which shows
that claimant was brought to K C General Hospital for the first
time on 29.11.2007 by her husband - Kumar and they had
given the history as "fall on 17.11.2007 after RTA (from
motorcycle) at 2.30 p.m. Pipeline Road, Kanakapura near
Manasa School. Patient is admitted in Orthopedic ward, taking
treatment under Orthopedic Surgeon and operated for the
same". Since only claimant and her husband had gone to K C
General Hospital and entry in the MLC register were signed by
the husband and claimant had marked her LTM on the same,
there is no ground to doubt the authenticity of the same.
Even before the learned Tribunal, it was not made out that
there was any ground to disbelieve the authenticity of Ex.R-4.
10. Ex.P-8 is the discharge card issued by K C General
Hospital. The history recorded therein "history of RTA fall
from motorcycle". Ex.P-5 is the wound certificate. The
history recorded therein reads as follows:
"Wounds and injuries found on the
person of a Smt. Jayasheela calling himself
Smt. Jayasheela aged 28 years, an inhabitant
of Kanakapura who was sent with - from - and
accompanied by Husband for report as to
certain injuries due to fall from motor cycle
(RTA) said to have been caused on 17/11/2007
and to be due to injuries due to fall.
Identification marks: LTM"
11. Ex.P-13 is the OPD book issued by the K C
General Hospital, Bangalore and produced by the claimant. It
is stated at page 4 therein as follows:
"29/11/2007
2.15 p.m.
h/o Fall on 17/11/07 after RTA (hit &
run) at 2.30 p.m. Pipeline road in Kanakapura
near Manasa School."
This would clearly show that even on 29.11.2007 claimant
was unaware of registration number of the offending vehicle
and the owner of same. It is stated in the history as "hit &
run". Even Ex.P-14, which is a case sheet shows that she was
admitted to the hospital on 17.11.2007 which is contrary to
entry in MLC register, Ex.R-4. There is no reference in
Ex.P-14 that accident had taken place on 16.11.2007. It is
the case of claimant that accident occurred on 16.11.2007.
12. As already noticed, complaint was lodged after 34
days by the claimant, who is a practicing Advocate. The
varying stands taken by the claimant regarding the accident
as per the entries in Exs.R-4, P-13, P-8, clearly shows that
even as per the history given by the claimant, accident had
taken place on 17.11.2007 and not on 16.11.2007. As on
29.11.2007 history given by the claimant was an incident of
'hit and run' and history was also to the effect that claimant
had fallen from the motorcycle.
13. The above evidence has not been considered by
the learned Member of the MACT in its proper perspective and
it is evident that claimant has projected a false case of motor
vehicle accident involving motorcycle bearing registration
No.KA-09-EJ-7962 in order to secure compensation. In that
view of the matter, appeal deserves to be allowed and award
made by the learned Tribunal is liable to be set aside. Hence,
the following:
JUDGMENT
(1) Appeal is allowed.
(2) Judgment and award dated 02.09.2010
passed in MVC No. 6921/2008 by the VI
Addl. Judge, Court of Small Causes and
MACT, Bengaluru City, is hereby set
aside and claim petition is dismissed.
(3) Amount in deposit, if any, shall be
refunded to the appellant forthwith.
(4) Registry to transmit the records to the
learned Tribunal forthwith.
(5) In view of appeal being disposed of,
Misc.Civil No.6111/2011 does not survive
for consideration and it stands rejected.
Sd/-
JUDGE
DR
