Icici Lombard Gen.Ins.Co.Ltd vs Anilkumar S/O Gurupadappa ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 9026 Kant

                            1


             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                    KALABURAGI BENCH

          DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JUNE 2022

                         BEFORE

       THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJENDRA BADAMIKAR
                   MFA No.32745/2013
                          C/W
                  MFA No.32743/2013 &
                 MFA No.32744/2013 (MV)

IN MFA NO.32745/2013:

BETWEEN:

ICICI LOMBARD GEN. INS, CO, LTD.,
NO.89 IIND FLOOR, S.V.R. COMPLEX,
HOSUR MAIN ROAD, MADIWAL,
BANGALORE, NOW REPRSENTED THROUGH
MANAGER LEGAL ICICI LOMBARD
GEN. INS, CO, LTD, IST FLOOR,
KOTHARI COMPLEX, S.V.PATEL CIRCLE,
GULBARGA.
                                           ... APPELLANT

(BY SRI. C.S.KALBURGI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     RAKESH S/O BHIMGOND KICHADI,
       AGE: 21 YEARS, OCC: ELECTRICIAN,
       R/O TEACHER'S COLONY,
       ASHRAM ROAD, BIJAPUR-586101.

2.     MR. PRASHANT S/O SRIKANT PATIL,
       AGE: MAJOR, OCC: VEHICLE OWNER
       R/O PARANDAMMA HOUSE # 2127/17,
                           2


       NEAR CORPORATION BANK,
       SAHAKARA NAGAR, BANGALORE-560001.
                                      ... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. RATHNA SHIVAYOGIMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
 APPEAL AGAINST R2 IS DISMISSED V/O. DTD.15.10.2020)

     THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 173(1) OF THE M.V.ACT, PRAYING TO CALL FOR
THE RECORDS AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED 27TH SEPTEMBER-2013 PASSED BY THE MOTOR
ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL NO.XII, BIJAPUR IN MVC
NO.1484/2011 AND TO MODIFY THE COMPENSATION
AWARDED AND TO PASS SUCH OTHER ORDERS AS THIS
HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT UNDER THE FACTS AND
CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE INCLUDING THE COSTS.

IN MFA NO.32743/2013

BETWEEN:

ICICI LOMBARD GEN. INS, CO, LTD.,
NO.89 IIND FLOOR, S.V.R. COMPLEX,
HOSUR MAIN ROAD, MADIWAL,
BANGALORE, NOW REPRSENTED THROUGH
MANAGER LEGAL ICICI LOMBARD
GEN. INS, CO, LTD, IST FLOOR,
KOTHARI COMPLEX, S.V.PATEL CIRCLE,
GULBARGA.
                                          ... APPELLANT
(BY SRI. C.S.KALBURGI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     SMT. GEETA @ IRAMMA
       W/O KASANAGOUDA PATIL,
       AGE: 46 YEARS,
       OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
       R/O C/O V.I. GANGASHETTI,
       AISHWARAYA NAGAR, ASHRAM ROAD,
       BIJAPUR-586101.
                           3


2.   SHRI. KASANAGOUDA
     S/O GURUNNAGOUDA PATIL,
     AGE: 56 YEARS, OCC: GOVERNMENT SERVANT,
     R/O C/O V.I. GANGASHETTI,
     AISHWARAYA NAGAR, ASHRAM ROAD,
     BIJAPUR-586101.

3.   SHRI. DEEPU S/O KASANAGOUDA PATIL,
     AGE: 20 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
     R/O C/O V.I. GANGASHETTI,
     AISHWARAYA NAGAR, ASHRAM ROAD,
     BIJAPUR-586101.

4.   MR. PRASHANT S/O SRIKANT PATIL,
     AGE: MAJOR, OCC: VEHICLE OWNER,
     R/O PARANDAMMA HOUSE # 2127/17,
     NEAR CORPORATION BANK,
     SAHAKARA NAGAR, BANGALORE-560001.
                                     ... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. BASAVARAJ R.MATH, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3;
          R4 - SERVED)

     THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 173(1) OF THE M.V.ACT, PRAYING TO CALL FOR
THE RECORDS AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED 27TH SEPTEMBER-2013 PASSED BY THE MOTOR
ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL NO.XII, BIJAPUR IN MVC
NO.1095/2011 AND TO MODIFY THE COMPENSATION
AWARDED AND TO PASS SUCH OTHER ORDERS AS THIS
HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT UNDER THE FACTS AND
CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE.

IN MFA NO.32744/2013

BETWEEN:

ICICI LOMBARD GEN. INS, CO, LTD.,
NO.89 IIND FLOOR, S.V.R. COMPLEX,
HOSUR MAIN ROAD, MADIWAL,
BANGALORE, NOW REPRSENTED THROUGH
                             4


MANAGER LEGAL ICICI LOMBARD
GEN. INS, CO, LTD, IST FLOOR,
KOTHARI COMPLEX, S.V.PATEL CIRCLE,
GULBARGA.
                                            ... APPELLANT

(BY SRI. C.S.KALBURGI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     ANILKUMAR S/O GURUPADAPPA
       SURGOND,
       AGE: 27 YEARS, OCC: FIELD OFFICER,
       IN CADILAR PHRAMACEUTICAL LTD.,
       AHMADABAD,
       R/O NEAR MALLIKARJUN ASHRAM,
       BIJAPUR-586101.

2.     MR. PRASHANT S/O SRIKANT PATIL,
       AGE: MAJOR, OCC: VEHICLE OWNER
       R/O PARANDAMMA HOUSE # 2127/17,
       NEAR CORPORATION BANK,
       SAHAKARA NAGAR, BANGALORE-560001.
                                       ... RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. RATNA N.SHIVAYOGIMATI, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
              R2 - SERVED.)

     THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 173(1) OF THE M.V.ACT, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE
RECORDS AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED 27TH SEPTEMBER-2013 PASSED BY THE MOTOR
ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL NO.XII, BIJAPUR IN MVC
NO.1483/2011 AND TO MODIFY THE COMPENSATION
AWARDED AND TO PASS SUCH OTHER ORDERS AS THIS
HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT UNDER THE FACTS AND
CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, INCLUDING THE COSTS.

     THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-
                             5


                       JUDGMENT

These three appeals are filed by the ICICI

Lombard General Insurance Company challenging the

common judgment and award dated 27.09.2013 passed

by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal No.XII, Bijapur

('Tribunal' for short) in MVC Nos. 1095/2011, 1483/2011

and 1484/2011 by partly allowing the claim petitions and

granting compensation of Rs.6,93,000/-, Rs.3,15,824/-

and Rs.2,19,164/- to the claimants respectively.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties

herein are referred as per the ranks occupied by them

before the Tribunal.

3. The brief factual matrix leading to the case

are that, on 04.02.2011 one Sri. Babu Patil, along with

his friends was travelling in car bearing Registration No.

KA.50/M.6620 from Bidarkundi to Bijapur, which was

driven by one Sangamesh. When the car being driven

half a kilometer away from Bidarkundi cross, the driver

of the said car drove it in rash and negligent manner with

high speed and as such, he lost control over the vehicle

and dashed to a tree situated by the side of the road and

caused accident. As a result, Babu Patil, one of inmates

of the car sustained grievous injuries all over the body

and died on the spot and other inmates of the car have

sustained injuries.

      4.     There     is   no   dispute      of   the   fact   that

Respondent       No.1 is the owner and Respondent No.2 is

the insurer of the offending vehicle. The Tribunal has

partly allowed all the three claim petitions and awarded

compensation as noted above, by fastening the liability

on Respondent No.2, who is appellant herein.

5. Being aggrieved by the quantum of

compensation awarded by the Tribunal and fastening the

liability on the insurance company, the insurance

company has filed these appeals.

6. Heard the arguments advanced by the learned

counsel for the appellant-insurance company and the

learned counsel for respondent/claimants. Perused the

records.

7. The main contention raised by the appellant-

insurance company is that, the driver of the offending

vehicle was holding only LLR and hence, the insurance

company is not liable to pay any compensation, as it

cannot be held as a valid driving licence. However, the

evidence disclose that the LLR was valid as on the date of

the accident. Further, it is also evident from the evidence

of RW.2 - RTO that, subsequently the driver was given

permanent D.L. and the LLR was not at all cancelled, nor

driver was disqualified. When the driver was

subsequently given permanent D.L. which continued with

LLR, the grounds urged by the learned counsel for the

appellant now holds no water. Further, this issue is

covered by the judgment of this Court reported in ILR

2015 KAR 4490 (Smt. Asha Datt vs. The New India

Assurance Co. Ltd. And Another).

8. The Tribunal has appreciated the oral and

documentary evidence and in paragraph Nos.31 to 33, it

has elaborately discussed the impact of LLR and

conversion of LLR into permanent D.L. Further, it has

also come in the evidence that one Veerupakshagouda

was also travelling in the vehicle, who was holding D.L.

9. Apart from that, it is also evident that the

owner has also filed a claim petition against the insurance

company, seeking compensation in respect of damages

caused to the vehicle due to the accident. It is evident

that the Consumer Forum at Bijapur has allowed the

claim petition and awarded compensation to the owner to

the tune of Rs.2,28,150/-. It is an admitted fact that the

said claim is satisfied by the insurance company. When

the insurance company has satisfied the claim of the

owner in pursuance of the order of the Consumer Forum,

now it is not open for the insurance company to raise the

same issue regarding LLR after having accepted the

liability.

10. Under such circumstances, looking to the facts

and circumstances, the appeals are devoid of any merits.

Further, there is no serious dispute regarding the

quantum of compensation and claimants have also not

sought any enhancement. No grounds are made out for

interference with the judgment and award passed by the

Tribunal. Hence, the appeals being devoid of merits stand

dismissed.

The amount in deposit shall be transmitted to the

Tribunal.

Sd/-

JUDGE KGR/LG