Karnataka High Court
Meenakshi D/O Sharanappa vs Adiveppa S/O Kallappa Tondihal on 24 May, 2022
Bench: Krishna S Dixit, P.Krishna Bhat
-1-
MFA No. 101299 of 2016
C/W MFA.CROB No. 100004 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF MAY, 2022
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.KRISHNA BHAT
MFA NO. 101299 OF 2016 (MV) C/W
MFA CROSS OBJ NO. 100004 OF 2017 (MV)
In MFA No.101299/2016
BETWEEN:
THE BRANCH MANAGER
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.,
LTD., SANMAN TOURIST COMPLEX
ISLAMPUR GANGAVATHI,
THROUGH IT DIVISIONAL OFFICE,
UMA MAHESHWARA RAO BUILDING,
STATION ROAD, HOSAPETE,
REPRESENTED THROUGH ITS
DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. N.R. KUPPELUR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. MEENAXI D/O SHARANAPPA @ HANUMANTAPPA
KURUBARA @ BILAKANTI,
AGE: 25 YEARS,
NAGAWWA W/O REVAPPA HUNASHIKATTI,
SINCE UNSOUND OF MIND,
REPRESENTED BY HER FATHER
SRI. SHARANAPPA @ HANUMATHAPPA
KURUBARA @ BILAKANTI,
AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE,
-2-
MFA No. 101299 of 2016
C/W MFA.CROB No. 100004 of 2017
R/O: CHIKKABANNAIGOL,
TQ: YELBURGA, DIST: KOPPAL.
2. YAMANAPPA S/O BADNEPPA LAMANI
AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS
and AGRICULTURE, R/O:CHIKKABANNIGOL,
TQ: YELBURGA, DIST: KOPPAL.
(OWNER OF THE TRACTOR-TRAILER
BEARING NO.KA-37/T-9314 and 9315)
3. ADIVEPPA S/O KALLAPPA TONDIHAL
AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC:DRIVER,
R/O:CHIKKABANNIGOL,
TQ: YELBURGA, DIST: KOPPAL.
(OWNER OF THE TRACTOR-TRAILER
BEARING NO.KA-37/T-9314 and 9315)
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. S C HIREMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R1)
(R2 - SERVED)(R3 - NOTICE DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE
MOTOR VEHICLES ACT AGAINST THE JDUGMENT AND AWARD
DATED 12.01.2016 PASSED IN MVC NO.19/2009 ON THE FILE
OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MEMBER, ADDITIONAL
MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, YELBURGA, AWARDING
COMPENSATION OF RS.1,58,000/- WITH INTEREST AT 6% P.A.
FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ITS REALISATION.
In MFA CROSS OBJ NO. 100004 OF 2017
BETWEEN:
MEENAKSHI D/O SHARANAPPA
@ HANAMANTAPPA KURUBAR
@ BILKANTHI, AGED 25 YEARS,
OCC: COOLIE NOW NIL,
MENTALLY UNSOUND
REPRESENTED BY HER NEXT FRIEND
AND NATURAL FATHER
SHARANAPPA @ HANAMANTAPPA
S/O KURUBAR @ BILKANTHI,
-3-
MFA No. 101299 of 2016
C/W MFA.CROB No. 100004 of 2017
AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE,
R/O: CHIKKABANNIGOL,
TAL: YALBURGA, DIST: KOPPAL.
...CROSS OBJECTOR
(BY SRI. S C HIREMATH, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. ADIVEPPA S/O KALLAPPA TONDIHAL,
AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: TRACTOR DRIVER,
R/O: TAVARAGERA,
TAL: KUSHTAGI, DIST: KOPPAL.
2. YAMANAPPA S/O BUDNEPPA LAMANI,
AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: OWNER OF
VEHICLE BEARING KA 37/T-9314
AND TRAILOR NO.KA 37/T-9315,
R/O: CHIKKABANNIGOL TANAD,
TAL: YALBURGA, DIST: KOPPAL.
3. THE BRANCH MANAGER,
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
BRANCH OFFICE AT SANMAN
TOURIST COMPLEX, ISLAMPUR,
GANGAWATI, DIST: KOPPAL.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. N.R.KUPPELLUR, ADVOCATE FOR R3)
(R1 - NOTICE DISPENSED WITH) (R2 - SERVED)
THIS MFA.CROB IN MFA NO.101299/2016 FILED UNDER
ORDER 41 RULE 22 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND
AWARD DATED 12.01.2016 PASSED IN MVC NO.19/2009 ON
THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS AND ADDITIONAL MOTOR
ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, YELBURGA, PARTLY ALLOWING
THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS MFA AND MFA CROB. COMING ON FOR ADMISSION
THIS DAY, P.KRISHNA BHAT, J, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-4-
MFA No. 101299 of 2016
C/W MFA.CROB No. 100004 of 2017
JUDGMENT
Both the insurance company as well as the claimant are
in separate appeal and cross-objection before us calling in
question the judgment and award dated 12.01.2016 passed
in M.V.C. No.19/2009 by the Senior Civil Judge & Additional
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Yelburga (hereinafter
referred to as 'the MACT' for short).
2. By the impugned award, the MACT has allowed
the MVC application in part by awarding compensation of
Rs.1,58,000/- with interest thereon at 6% per annum.
3. While the insurance company vehemently
contends that the MVC application was founded entirely on a
false case and therefore, the learned MACT was in error in
allowing the same in part, the claimant, per contra, contends
that she has a strong case for award of a much higher
compensation on account of the extremely severe head
injury suffered by her consequent upon the motor vehicle
accident involving a tractor & trailor bearing Registration
MFA No. 101299 of 2016
C/W MFA.CROB No. 100004 of 2017
No.KA-37/T-9314 and KA-37/T-9315 insured with the
appellant insurance company.
4. We have heard the learned counsel on both sides
in the appeal and the cross-objection; and we have carefully
perused the records.
5. Having perused the records and appreciated the
arguments submitted on both sides, we are not convinced
that the MVC application was founded on a genuine case
and, on the other hand, the Ex.P.4 conclusively shows that
the accident resulting in injuries to the claimant was
projected on a false premise inasmuch as Ex.P.4, which is a
certificate issued by Basel Mission (C.S.I.) Hospital, Gadag-
Betgeri, where the claimant was admittedly taken to
immediately following the accident, reflects as under:
" Certificate
This is to certify that wound certificate regarding
Meenakshi Hanmantappa Kurbar, Age: 18, Sex:
Female, brought to this hospital on 9.10.08 at 9.30 AM
with H/O fall from Roof Top of her house in
Chikkabannigol, Tal Yelburga, with Head Injury was in
MFA No. 101299 of 2016
C/W MFA.CROB No. 100004 of 2017
a grievous condition and was immediately referred and
shifted to higher centre (S.D.M. College of Medical
Science and Hospital, Dharwad) for further Evaluation
and treatment, hence wouNd certificate not issued.
10.12.08 Sd/-
Resident Medical Officer
Basel Mission (CSI) Hospital,
Betgeri-Gadag-582102."
6. What is extremely relevant to note for the
purpose of deciding this appeal is, the claimant having
produced Ex.P.4 before the learned MACT has taken a stand
that the injury was caused due to fall from the offending
tractor-trailor, contrary to what is mentioned in Ex.P.4 to the
effect that injury was on account of fall from the roof-top.
The claimant has not chosen to examine the doctor from
Basel Mission (C.S.I.) Hospital, who has issued the said
document. The document, undoubtedly, emanating from a
hospital of some repute has not been questioned or its
credibility has not been impeached by the claimant. This
completely gives a lie to the case of the claimant that she
had indeed suffered serious injuries following the motor
MFA No. 101299 of 2016
C/W MFA.CROB No. 100004 of 2017
vehicular accident involving the tractor-trailor insured with
the appellant-insurance company. In that view of the matter,
we need not go into other records produced by way of
evidence in this case and more especially on account of the
fact that P.W.1, who is the father of the claimant, admittedly
is not an eye witness to the incident. It is also of some
relevance to refer to the fact that admittedly Ex.P.1-
complaint was lodged after four days of the alleged date of
incident. There is no credible explanation offered for the
delay in lodging the complaint if the accident and the
resultant injuries as claimed by the claimant was a genuine
one. P.W.2 is projected as an eye witness by the claimant in
support of the genuineness of the accident. As already
indicated hereinabove, the complaint, following which the
charge sheet was filed, itself is shrouded with suspicion
chiefly on account of the fact that it was filed with
unexplained delay. In that view of the matter, we have no
hesitation to come to a conclusion that the learned MACT has
fallen into an error in not adverting to this very important
MFA No. 101299 of 2016
C/W MFA.CROB No. 100004 of 2017
aspect of evidence and consequently allowing the claim
petition with which are in complete disagreement. Therefore,
the claim petition is liable to be rejected.
7. Accordingly, the appeal of the insurance company
is allowed and the claim petition is dismissed. Consequently,
the cross-objection of the claimant for enhancement is
dismissed.
No order as to costs.
The amount in deposit before this Court shall be
refunded to the appellant-insurance company forthwith.
Registry to return the Trial Court Records to the
learned MACT immediately.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
KMS
