The Divisional Manager vs Gurunath S/O Ishwarappa ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 4150 Kant

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                 DHARWAD BENCH
     DATED THIS THE 10 T H DAY OF MARCH, 2022
                       BEFORE
THE HON 'BLE MR.JUSTICE N .S.SANJAY GOWDA

              M.F.A.No.21753/2010 (WC)
BETWEEN:

THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
DIVISIONAL OFFICE, SUJATHA COMPLEX,
HUBLI.                                ... APPELLANT

(BY SHRI S.K.KAYAKAMATH, ADV.)

AND:

1.     GURUNATH S/O ISHWARAPPA KURTAKOTI,
       AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER,
       NOW-NIL. R/O TANAGIRI ONI,
       KUNDAGOL, DIST: DHARWAD.

2.     ARAVIND MOTORS PRIVATE LTD.
       NO 19, SHIVASHANKAR PLAZA,
       LALBHAG ROAD, RICHMAND CIRCLE,
       BANGALORE.                     ... RESPONDENTS

(BY SHRI H.R.GUNDAPPA, ADV. FOR R2,
    R1- SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

      THIS MFA FILED U/S. 30(1) OF WORKMEN'S
COMPENSATION ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED:29.12.2009 PASSED IN WCA/F. NO.45/2005, ON THE
FILE OF THE LABOUR OFFICER & COMMISSIONER FOR
WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION, SUB-DIVISION - II, HUBLI,
AWARDING THE COMPENSATION OF RS.77,795/- WITH
INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 12% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF
PETITION TILL ITS DEPOSIT.
                             :2:




      THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

                        JUDGMENT

It is not in dispute that in the present case, a transit

motor vehicle policy was issued in favour of Arvind Motors

Pvt. Ltd.,

2. It is also not in dispute that the employee of

Arvind Motors Pvt. Ltd., i.e., the claimant Gurunath, met

with an accident and suffered injuries. The Commissioner

on assessment of the evidence has come to the conclusion

that the claimant has suffered injuries and was entitled to

a sum of Rs.77,795/- along with interest at 12% p.m.

3. The only contention advanced by the learned

counsel for the appellant/Insurance Company is that the

transit policy did not mention the registration number of

the vehicle since the vehicle was yet to be registered and

was in transit. He submits that in such a case, it was for

the claimant to establish that the vehicle which met with

the accident was the vehicle which was covered under the

transit policy as defined by its chassis number and engine

number. He submits that since this had not been

established, the award cannot be sustained.

4. A perusal of the objections filed by the

Insurance Company does not indicate such a stand having

been taken. The Insurance Company, in its objections,

has denied all the averments and has merely stated that

the policy, if any, issued would be subject to the terms,

exceptions and conditions of the policy. Since a plea

regarding the requirement of establishing that the vehicle

which met with an accident was identified with reference

to the chassis number or engine number as mentioned in

the policy, such a contention cannot be advanced in an

appeal.

5. No question of law arises for consideration in

this appeal and it is therefore dismissed.

(Sd/-) JUDGE

Jm/-