Karnataka High Court
Smt Rathnamma vs Sri Chaluvaraj on 8 April, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:14398-DB
MFA No. 6047 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.6047 OF 2019 (ECA)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. RATHNAMMA
W/O PUTTEGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS
2. SRI. PUTTEGOWDA
S/O LATE KARIGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS
BOTH ARE R/AT NO.196,
C/O SHIVALINGEGOWDA,
BUILDING NO.22, HOUSE NO.46,
MARUTHI APARTMENT,
Digitally
signed by C K.H.B. COLONY, KENGERI STLET TOWN,
HONNUR SAB BENGALURU-560 056.
Location: ...APPELLANTS
HIGH COURT
OF (BY SRI. UDAYA KUMAR R.L., ADVOCATE)
KARNATAKA
AND:
1. SRI. CHALUVARAJ
S/O RAMASWAMYREDDY,
AGED: MAJOR,
C/O NANDAKUMAR,
NO.33, GURUMANGALA,
HUSKRI POST, ANEKAL,
BENGALURU-560 099.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:14398-DB
MFA No. 6047 of 2019
2. BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD
GROUND FLOOR, NO.31,
1ST CROSS, NEW MISSION ROAD,
NEXT TO JAIN COLLEGE,
BENGALURU STOCK EXCHANGE,
BENGALURU-560 002
(REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER)
3. MR.CHETHAN S.
S/O SHIVAKUMAR B.S.
AGED: MAJOR, R/AT NO.132, KONANAKUNTE
BENGALURU-560 062.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SANMATHI E.I., ADVOCATE FOR R2;
VIDE ORDER DATED 19.01.2024
NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH;
VIDE ORDER DATED 04.03.2024
SERVICE OF NOTICE TO R3 IS HELD SUFFICIENT)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 30(1) OF WORK MENS COMPENSATION ACT,
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 15.03.2019
PASSED IN ECA NO.276/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE IX
ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE & XXXIV ACMM, COURT OF
SMALL CAUSES, MEMBER, MACT-7, BENGALURU, DISMISSING
THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
1. This appeal is filed challenging the Judgment and Award
dated 15.03.2019 in ECA No.276/2014 on the file of IX Addl.
NC: 2024:KHC:14398-DB
Small Causes and Addl. MACT, Bengaluru (hereinafter referred
to as 'the Tribunal').
2. The claim petition is filed on the premise that the motor-
vehicle accident took place on 03.01.2011 at about 10.45 a.m.
at Bhavani to Salem road junction. It is the case of the
appellants that Shivakumar was the driver of the Toyota Qualis
car bearing registration No. KA-02/P-1984. It is further stated
that the accident took place as the vehicle hit the median.
Shivakumar sustained injuries in the accident. He was taken to
the hospital and he was declared dead.
3. The claim petition is filed by the parents of late
Shivakumar. It is stated that Shivakumar was a bachelor. The
respondent No.2 - Insurance Company has filed objections to
the claim petition. The insurer took the stand that though
there was a policy in favour of the owner of the vehicle, the
terms and conditions of the insurance policy were violated and
the driver did not possess valid driving licence to drive the
vehicle in question.
4. The Tribunal on consideration of the material on record
dismissed the petition on the premise that the petitioners did
NC: 2024:KHC:14398-DB
not produce driving licence of the driver who was driving the
vehicle at the time of accident. It is also the finding of the
Tribunal that relationship of employer and employee is not
established.
5. Aggrieved by the said Judgment and award dismissing
the claim petition, the present appeal is filed.
6. The appellants have also filed an application under Order
XLI Rule 27(b) of Civil Procedure Code, seeking permission of
this Court to produce additional document as evidence. Along
with the application, the applicants have produced a notarized
copy of the driving licence of late Shivakumar who was driving
the vehicle. The respondent - insurance company has not filed
its statement of objections to the said application.
7. After going through the records, this Court is of the view
that the appellants should be given an opportunity to establish
their case that the driver was possessing the driving licence at
the time of accident as the driving licence is a material
document in a case of this nature. It is also noticed that the
owner of the vehicle remained exparte before the Tribunal and
he has also remained absent before this Court. Learned counsel
NC: 2024:KHC:14398-DB
for the appellants has also submitted that appellants would like
to lead evidence to establish the relationship of employer and
employee.
8. Since the appellants are seeking permission to lead
evidence by producing the driving licence which according to
this Court are material for proper adjudication of the case, the
appellants should also be permitted to lead evidence relating to
the relationship of employer and employee. Accordingly,
impugned Judgment and Award are set aside.
9. Hence, the following:
ORDER
(i) The impugned judgment and award dated
15.03.2019 in ECA No.276/2014 on the file of IX Addl. Small
Causes and Addl. MACT, Bengaluru, are hereby set aside.
(ii) The matter is remitted to the IX Addl. Small Causes
and Addl. MACT, Bengaluru for fresh consideration.
(iii) The IX Addl. Small Causes and Addl. MACT,
Bengaluru shall permit the parties to the proceedings to
produce additional evidence/document subject to all just
NC: 2024:KHC:14398-DB
exceptions and after considering the material on record, the IX
Addl. Small Causes and Addl. MACT, Bengaluru shall pass
appropriate orders.
(iv) It is made clear that this Court has not expressed
any opinion on the merits of the case. All contentions kept
open
(v) The parties shall appear before the IX Addl. Small
Causes and Addl. MACT, Bengaluru on 31.05.2024. The Trial
Court shall also issue fresh notice to respondent No.3 in ECA
No.276/2014, and dispose of the matter afresh in accordance
with law.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
sac
