Karnataka High Court
The Divisional Manager vs Kiran S/O Puttappa Ardhageri on 17 February, 2022
Bench: S.Vishwajith Shetty
1 M.F.A.24552/2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 17 T H DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
M.F.A. No .24552/2012 (MV)
BET WEEN
THE DIV IS IONAL MANAGER,
ORIENTAL INSU RA NCE COMPANY LIMITED,
DIV IS IONAL OFFICE, ENKAY COMPLEX ,
KESHWAPU R HUB LI,
REPRES ENTED THROU GH ITS REG ION AL OFFICE,
SU MANGALA COMPLEX 2ND FLOOR,S TATION ROAD,
HU BLI, REPRESENTED B Y IT S ASSISTANT MANAGER.
... APPELLANT
(BY SRI.N.R.KU PPELU R, ADVOCATE)
AND
1 . SRI. KIRAN S/O PU TTAPPA ARDHAGERI,
AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE,
R/O: KOLUR CAMP, B YADGI,
DIST: HAVER I.
2 . SRI. VENKAP PA S/O HULIG EPPA KURAKUNDI,
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O: HU GAR GALL I, B YADGI,
DIST: HAVER I.
...RESP ONDENTS
(BY SRI. LOKESH MALAVALLI, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEA L IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR VEH ICLES ACT, 1988, AGAINST
THE JU DGMENT AND AWARD DATED 01.08.2012
PASSED IN MVC No.546/ 2007 ON THE FILE O F THE SENIOR
CIVIL JU DGE AND MEMBER, ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT
CLAIMS TRIB UNAL, I.T .COU RT, B YADAGI, AWARDING THE
COMPENSATION OF ` 1,60,200/- WIT H INT EREST AT THE
2 M.F.A.24552/2012
RATE OF 6% P.A, FROM THE DAT E OF PETIT ION TIL L ITS
REAL ISATION.
THIS APPEA L COMING ON FOR HEARING, TH IS DAY
THE COU RT DELIVERED THE FOLL OWING:
J U D G M E N T
The insurer of the offend ing vehicle bearing
registration No.KA-27/9127 has preferred this app eal
challenging the judgment and award dated 18 t h
August 2012 passed by the Addl.M.A.C.T., Byadgi
insofar as it relates to saddling the liability to pay
compensation on it.
2. The parties to this appeal are referred to by
their rankings before the Tribunal for the sake of
convenience.
The undisputed facts of the case are that on
14.05.2007 at about 9.00 p.m. when the claimant
was walking on Byadgi-Kadaarmandalagi road
towards Teachers' Housing colony, the offending
vehicle bearing registration No.KA-27/9127 which
came from Byadgi side dashed against the claimant
and caused the accident. In the said accident, the
3 M.F.A.24552/2012
claimant suffered grievous injuries and was admitted
in a hospital as inpatient. It is under these
circumstances, a claim petition was filed under
Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for
short, the 'Act'), claiming compensation against the
owner and insurer of the offending vehicle bearing
registration No.KA-27/9127.
The Tribunal had partly allowed the claim
petition and awarded a compensation of `1,60,200/-
with interest @ 6% from the date of petition till
realization and had saddled the liability to pay
compensation on the insurer of the offending vehicle.
On the ground that the driver of the offending vehicle
did not possess a valid and effective driving licence
as on the date of the accident, the insurer of the
offending vehicle has challenged the impugned
judgment and award before this court in this appeal.
3. Learned counsel for the insurer submits
that the driver of the offending vehicle possessed
only a light motor vehicle (non-transport) driving
4 M.F.A.24552/2012
licence as on the date of the accident and the vehicle
which was involved in the accident was a transport
vehicle and therefore, the Tribunal was not justified
in saddling the liability on the insurer of the
offending vehicle to pay compensation.
4. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for
the respondents submits that having regard to the
judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
Mukund Dewangan -vs- Oriental Insurance
Co.Ltd. 1, since the driver of the offending vehicle
possessed a Driving licence to drive a similar class of
vehicle, the Tribunal was fully justified in saddling
the liability on the insurer of the offending vehicle
and accordingly prays to dismiss the appeal.
5. I have carefully appreciated the arguments
addressed on both sides and also perused the
material available on record.
6. It is not in dispute that the offending
vehicle bearing registration No.KA-27/9127 which
(2017) 14 SCC 663
5 M.F.A.24552/2012
was involved in the accident in question was duly
insured as on the date of accident and the said
insurance policy issued by the appellant/Insurance
Company was valid as on the date of accident. The
only question that arises for consideration in this
appeal is whether the driver of the offending vehicle
had a valid and effective driving licence as on the
date of accident.
7. It is not in dispute that the driver of the
offending vehicle possessed a valid and effective
driving licence to drive a light motor vehicle (non-
transport) as on the date of the accident. Even
though the vehicle involved in the accident is a
transport vehicle, having regard to the judgment of
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mukund
Dewangan (supra), the Tribunal was fully justified
in saddling the liability to pay the compensation
amount on the insurer of the offending vehicle
bearing registration No.KA-27/9127.
6 M.F.A.24552/2012
8. I find no irregularity or illegality in the
impugned judgment and award passed by the
Tribunal. Therefore, the appeal does not merit
consideration.
9. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. The
amount in deposit is directed to be transmitted to the
Tribunal for the purpose of disbursement.
Sd/-
JUDGE
KNM/-
