Karnataka High Court
M/S Sri. Suguna Poultry Farm Ltd vs Mangalore Electrical Supply Co. ... on 10 June, 2022
Bench: Hanchate Sanjeevkumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.6040/2016(MV-DM)
BETWEEN:
M/S. SRI SUGUNA POULTRY FARM LTD
REP.BY ITS MANAGER
NO.5, SRI GANESH COMPLEX
1ST FLOOR, 80 FEET ROAD
INDIRANAGAR
BENGALURU-560 038
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI SURESH M., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. MANGALORE ELECTRICAL SUPPLY CO.LTD.,
REP. BY ITS ASST.EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
O. & M.SUB-DIVISION
MESCOM
BHADRAVATHI-577301
2. THE BRANCH MANAGER
RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
5TH FLOOR, CENTURION BUILDING
M.G.ROAD
BENGALURU-560001
3. SRI. DINESH M
S/O MONAPPA POOJARI M
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS
R/O NO.397, CHIKKABIDARAKALLU
NAGASANDRA POST
BENGALURU NORTH-560073
2
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI PRASHANTH T. PANDIT, ADVOCATE FOR R1
SRI. D.VIJAY KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2 THROUGH VC
R3- NOTICE DISPENSED WITH V/O DATED;03.11.2017)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED U/S 173(1)
OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED
31.03.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.625/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE
FAST TRACK AND ADDITIONAL M.A.C.T(V) BHADRAVATHI,
AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.1,09,870/- WITH INTEREST AT
6% PER ANNUM FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION.
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL COMING ON FOR
ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed under Section-173(1) of the Motor
Vehicles Act, by the appellant-owner of the vehicle challenging
the judgment and award dated 31.03.2015, passed In MVC
No.625/2012, on the file of learned Fast Track and Additional
MACT at Bhadravathi.
Brief facts:
2. It is stated that on 01.05.2012 at about 12.00 p.m.,
respondent No.3 being the driver of the Eicher Cantor Lorry
bearing No.KA-03-C-9599 drove the vehicle in rash and
negligent manner and dashed against the electrical pole and
transformer of respondent No.1 near Visveswarayya Nagara
bypass road, Bhadravathi and on account of the said accident
there was damage to the RCC pole and transformer causing loss
to respondent No.1 and that the appellant herein is the owner
and respondent No.2 is the insurer of the said vehicle.
3. The Tribunal awarded a compensation of
Rs.1,09,870/- and fixed compensation liable to pay on driver and
owner of the Cantor Lorry, on the ground that by observing
there is no insurance policy coverage between the appellant and
respondent No.2. On these grounds that Tribunal has
exonerated the insurance company and fixed liability on the
driver and owner of Cantor Lorry.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant
submitted that there is a valid insurance coverage in respect of
the vehicle between the appellant and respondent No.2-
Insurance Company and also driver of the Lorry was holding
valid and effective driving license as on the date of accident, but
have not produced it before the Tribunal. Therefore, prays for
production of the same before this Court or remand to the
Tribunal to produce before the Tribunal.
5. He further submitted that the appellant has made
correspondence with respondent No.2-Insurance Company and
admitted their liability by virtue of contract between the
respondent and in case if there was a valid and effective driving
license then respondent No.2 assured that they would satisfy the
liability. Therefore, prayed for remanding the case for re-
consideration.
5. Heard arguments of the learned counsel for the
appellant and the learned counsel for the respondents and
perused the materials on record.
6. The Tribunal, while answering issues and fixing
liability, placed respondent Nos.1 and 2 exparte, who are driver
and owner of the Cantor Lorry and herein they are appellant and
respondent No.3, respectively. The appellant being the owner of
the vehicle have not contested the case before the Tribunal and
the Tribunal observed that there is no proof regarding insurance
coverage. Hence, exonerated respondent No.2 -Insurance Policy
and thus fixed liability on respondent Nos.1 and 2. Now the
learned counsel submitted that there was a valid insurance
policy and also the driver was holding valid and effective driving
license as on the date of accident and they would produce the
same before the Tribunal. Therefore, requested to remand the
matter to the Tribunal. Considering their submissions in the
case if there is a valid Insurance policy between the owner and
insurer and also driver was holding a valid and effective driving
license as on the date of accident while driving the offending
Lorry, it is just and proper to remand the case giving an
opportunity to the appellant to produce the said documents
before the Tribunal for proper assessment and determination.
Considering the contentions taken by all the parties the matter is
required to be remanded to the Tribunal for fresh consideration
on all aspects regarding liability as well as quantum of
compensation. Therefore, the judgment and award passed by
the Tribunal is hereby set aside by allowing the appeal.
Accordingly, I pass the following:
ORDER
i. The appeal is allowed.
ii. The judgment and award dated 31.03.2015, passed
In MVC No.625/2012, on the file of learned Fast
Track and Additional MACT at Bhadravathi, is hereby
set aside. The matter is remanded to the Tribunal
for fresh consideration on liability as well as quantum
of compensation.
iii. All the contentions of the parties are kept open.
iv. The amount deposited shall be sent to the Tribunal
along with certified copy of the order passed by this
Court forthwith.
v. There was delay of 427 days in filing the appeal and
delay is condoned by the order dated 26.08.2021.
Therefore, respondent No.2- Insurance company is
not liable to pay interest for this delayed period.
Sd/-
JUDGE
SKS
