Sri. Praveen Kumar vs K. C. Ramesha
2022 Latest Caselaw 12431 Kant

                            1



       IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

         DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2022

                         BEFORE

           THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P. SANDESH

                 M.F.A.No.8067/2016 (MV-I)

BETWEEN:

SRI PRAVEEN KUMAR
S/O. SAMBULINGAPPA,
APPIHALLI VILLAGE,
HALEBEEDU HOBLI,
BELUR TALUK,
HASSAN DISTRICT.                             ... APPELLANT

           (BY SRI CALVIN FURTADO, ADVOCATE FOR
               SRI K.V.NARASIMHAN, ADVOCATE)
AND:

1.     K. C. RAMESHA
       S/O. LATE PUTTASWAMAPPA,
       AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
       NEAR NETHAJI SCHOOL,
       VIDYANAGARA,
       HASSAN-573201

2.     THE NEW INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
       CHANDANA COMPLEX,
       HARSHAMAHAL ROAD,
       HASSAN-573 201.                  ... RESPONDENTS

          (BY SRI E I SANMATHI, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
              NOTICE TO R1 IS HELD SUFFICIENT
           VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 13.10.2022)
                                   2



     THIS M.F.A IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 01.09.2016
PASSED IN MVC NO.134/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE 5TH
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSION JUDGE AND ADDL. MACT
AT HASSAN AND ETC.

    THIS M.F.A. COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

                           JUDGMENT

This matter is listed for orders and with the consent of

both the learned counsel, taken up for disposal.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the

appellant and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent

No.2.

3. This appeal is filed challenging the judgment and

award dated 01.09.2016 passed in M.V.C.No.134/2015 on the

file of the V Additional District and Sessions Court and Additional

MACT, Hassan ('the Tribunal' for short).

4. The Tribunal after considering the claim petition,

exonerated the liability of the Insurance Company on the ground

that there is no FC. Hence, the present appeal is filed by the

owner of the offending vehicle.

5. The contention of the learned counsel appearing for

the appellant is that the policy was in force as on the date of the

accident and the Tribunal has committed an error in fastening

the liability on the owner on the ground that the vehicle was

having only temporary registration and no FC. Hence, the

present appeal is filed.

6. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent

No.2 submits that the Tribunal has taken note of the fact that

there was no FC as on the date of the accident and only having

temporary registration and hence, the Tribunal has rightly comes

to the conclusion that as there is no FC, the owner of the

offending vehicle is entitled to pay the compensation. Hence, it

does not requires any interference.

7. Having heard the respective counsel appearing for

the parties and also taken note of the reasoning assigned by the

Tribunal wherein the Tribunal has observed that the offending

vehicle was having temporary registration and it is also not in

dispute that there was a policy and the same was valid as on the

date of the accident. When such being the case, the Tribunal

ought not to have exonerated the liability of the Insurance

Company. Hence, the order of the Tribunal is to be set aside.

8. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of by allowing the

same. The liability is fastened on the Insurance Company and

not on the insured. The Insurance Company is directed to pay

the amount within six weeks from today.

9. The amount in deposit, if any, is ordered to be

refunded in favour of the appellant on proper identification.

Sd/-

JUDGE

SN