Karnataka High Court
M/S United India vs Chikkalinge Gowda on 4 December, 2023
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:43922
MFA No. 4631 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 4631 OF 2017 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
M/S UNITED INDIA
INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
DIVISIONAL OFFICE
M C ROAD, MANDYA
NOW REP BY ITS:
REGIONAL OFFICE,
6TH FLOOR,
KRISHI BHAVAN
NRUPATHUNGA ROAD
BENGALURU 560001
Digitally
signed by JAI REPRESENTED BY ITS
JYOTHI J
Location:
AUTHORZED SIGNATORY
HIGH COURT ...APPELLANT
OF
KARNATAKA
(BY SRI. A M VENKATESH.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. CHIKKALINGE GOWDA
S/O KANDYDA NATHEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
R/O DODDAGARUDANAHALLI VILLAGE,
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:43922
MFA No. 4631 of 2017
BASARALU HOBLI,
MANDYA TALUK 571401
2. MAHALINGEGWODA
S/O DODDALINGEGOWDA
MAJOR,
R/O DODDAGARUDANAHALLI VILLAGE,
BASARALU HOBLI,
MANDYA TALUK - 571401
(OWNER OF TRACTOR BEARING NO.KA-11/T-
6827)571401
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. LAKSHMIKANTH K.,ADVOCATE FOR R1;
R2- SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED01.02.2017 PASSED
IN MVC NO.162/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, MANDYA, AWARDING
COMPENSATION OF RS. 4,23,250/-WITH INTEREST AT 9%
P.A.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR JUDGMENT, THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This is an appeal filed by the Insurance Company
aggrieved by the award passed in MVC.No.162/2011 dated
NC: 2023:KHC:43922
01.02.2017 on the file of the II Addl. Senior Civil Judge
and MACT, Mandya.
2. The claim petition was filed by the claimant
seeking compensation of an amount of Rs.8,50,000/- for
the injuries sustained by the claimant in the accident. The
case of the claimant is that on 13.01.2010 after finishing
his work the claimant was returning to his village and
boarded a tractor which was going towards the village. At
around 3.30 p.m while the claimant got down from the
tractor and when he was about to move towards the gate,
driver of the tractor drove the same in a rash and
negligent manner and hook of the tractor dragged the
claimant and he fell down. The hind wheel of the said
tractor ran over the left hand of the claimant. As a result,
he sustained grievous injuries. It is the case of the
insurance company that he was traveling as a gratuitous
passenger in a goods vehicle and insurance company is
not liable to pay the compensation. The court below on
the issue of liability had held that best witness is the
NC: 2023:KHC:43922
claimant and he is the best person to depose regarding the
mode of accident. Mere filing of final report will not lead
to the conclusion that the claimant was traveling as a
passenger in the said tractor when the accident took place.
Accordingly, the court below held that the insurance
company is liable to pay the compensation and awarded
compensation of an amount of Rs.4,23,250/-.
3. Aggrieved thereby the insurance company is
before this court. Learned counsel for the insurance
company submits that the claimant was traveling as
gratuitous passenger and even it is their case that they
were traveling in a tractor. He submits that the claimant
had given a complaint to the police wherein he had stated
which is marked at Ex.P-2 that they boarded the tractor,
after five minutes they were asked to alight from the
tractor. The other person alighted and when he was about
to alight, the driver of the tractor all of a sudden moved it
and he fell down. Due to which hind wheel of the tractor
ran over the left hand and he sustained serious injuries all
NC: 2023:KHC:43922
over the body. It is submitted that while he was traveling
as gratuitous passenger and while he was about to alight
from the tractor, the accident had taken place. As per the
terms and conditions of the policy, the insurance company
is not liable to pay the compensation, except the driver no
other person is covered by the policy. He submits that
basing on the said complaint, investigation was done and
the charge sheet is filed and he had drawn the attention of
the court to the charge sheet.
4. On the contrary, the learned counsel for the
claimant submits that the claimant is a illiterate person, as
such he has given a complaint before the police. It is
submitted that the charge sheet cannot be a basis for the
court to arrive at a conclusion. The court below had taken
into consideration, the evidence of the claimant as well as
medical reports which are at the earliest point of time. He
had relied on the order passed by the Orissa High Court in
NC: 2023:KHC:43922
the case of Mathaji Bewa -Vs- Hemanth Kumar Jena1
and submits that the Trial Court had rightly granted the
compensation holding that the insurance company is liable
to pay the compensation.
[
5. Having heard the learned counsel on either
side, perused the entire material on record. The argument
of the learned counsel for the claimant, that the charge
sheet alone cannot be the basis and the court has to look
at the evidence of the claimant as well as medical
documents in this case. As per the medical documents,
the tractor had ran over left hand and he had sustained
the injuries. The claimant himself had gone before the
police and given a complaint stating that he was traveling
in the tractor and while he was getting down from the
tractor, this accident had taken place. Basing on that a
charge sheet is filed, in those circumstances, it cannot be
said that the contents of the charge sheet cannot be taken
LAWS (ORI) -1993-8-30
NC: 2023:KHC:43922
into consideration. When complaint is given by the
claimant himself, the court has to consider the said
complaint given by the claimant. The contents of the
complaint clearly shows that he is an unauthorized
passenger, whereas it appears that for the purpose of
claiming compensation, a story has been invented when
he was walking on the road, he was hit by the tractor.
This court considering Ex.P-2 comes to the conclusion that
he was a gratuitous passenger traveling in a tractor and in
that process he had sustained injuries. In that view of the
matter, the insurance company is not liable to pay the
compensation. It is the owner of the vehicle alone who is
liable to pay the compensation.
6. Accordingly, appeal of the insurance company is
Allowed as the owner of the vehicle alone is liable to pay
the compensation.
(a) The compensation amount shall carry
interest @ 6% per annum from the date
of petition, till the date of realization.
NC: 2023:KHC:43922
(b) Respondent-Owner of the vehicle shall
deposit the said compensation amount
with accrued interest before the tribunal
within a period of 8 (Eight) weeks.
(c) The amount is deposit, the Insurance
Company is at liberty to withdraw the
same.
(d) The Registry is directed to return the Trial
Court Record to the Tribunal along with
the certified copy of the order passed by
this court forthwith without any delay.
(e) No Costs.
Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall
stand closed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
TS
