Karnataka High Court
United India Insurance Co Ltd vs Karnataka State Road Transport ... on 18 April, 2024
Author: Jyoti Mulimani
Bench: Jyoti Mulimani
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:15292
MFA No. 2861 of 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 2861 OF 2014
(MV-DM)
BETWEEN:
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
MYSORE DO,
THROUGH ITS REGIONAL OFFICE,
KRISHI BHAVAN BUILDING,
NRUPATHUNGA ROAD,
BANGALORE-560 009.
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER,
SRI. K.CHANDRASHEKAR.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. ANUP SEETHA RAMA RAO., ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. SEETHA RAMA RAO.B.C., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. KARNATAKA STATE ROAD
TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
Digitally signed by
PREMCHANDRA M R MYSORE RURAL DIVISION,
Location: HIGH MYSORE,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER.
2. SRI. CHANDRASHEKAR
S/O ANNEGOWDA,
MAJOR,
DEVARAHALLI VILLAGE, BILIKERE HOBLI,
HUNSUR TALUK, MYSORE DISTRICT-571 105.
(OWNER OF LORRY NO.KA.20/335).
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. D.VIJAY KUMAR., ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI. K.H.THIMMAIAH., ADVOCATE FOR R2)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:15292
MFA No. 2861 of 2014
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 173(1) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988,
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:03.12.2013
PASSED IN MVC NO.1072/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE III
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE & MEMBER, MACT, MYSORE.
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS COMING ON FOR
DICTATING JUDGMENT, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Sri.Anup Seetha Rama Rao., learned counsel on behalf of
Sri.Seetha Rama Rao.B.C., for the appellant and
Sri.K.H.Thimmaiah., for respondent No.2 have appeared in
person.
Sri.D.Vijay Kumar., learned counsel for respondent No.1
has appeared through video conferencing.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are
referred to as per their status and rankings before the Tribunal.
3. The brief facts are these:
On the Sixteenth day of November 2010, a KSRTC Bus
bearing Registration No.KA-09-F-3826 was proceeding towards
Mysore from Konanur and after K.R.Nagar in between
NC: 2024:KHC:15292
Kumbarakoppalu and Doddekoppalu, a driver of a lorry bearing
Registration No.KA-20-335 came from opposite direction in a
rash and negligent manner and hit the right side back portion
of the KSRTC bus. Due to which, the damage was caused to the
bus. Hence, the KSRTC contended that it has incurred repairs
charges and accordingly filed a claim petition seeking
compensation towards damage of the property.
In response to the notice, the first respondent - owner of
the Lorry remained absent before the Tribunal and hence, he
was placed ex-parte. The second respondent - Insurance
company appeared through its counsel and filed statement of
objections denying the petition averments. Among other
grounds, it prayed for dismissal of the Claim Petition.
Based on the above pleadings, the Tribunal framed
issues; parties led evidence and marked the documents. The
Tribunal vide Judgment dated:03.12.2013 partly allowed the
claim petition and awarded compensation of Rs.89,116/- with
6% interest per annum from the date of petition till realization
and directed the Insurance Company to pay the compensation
amount. The Insurance Company has assailed the Judgment of
NC: 2024:KHC:15292
the Tribunal in this appeal on several grounds as set-out in the
Memorandum of appeal.
4. Learned counsel for the respective parties have
urged several contentions.
Sri.Anup Seetharama Rao., learned counsel for the
Insurance Company in presenting his arguments strenuously
urged that the Tribunal has erred in concluding that the
Insurance Company is liable to pay compensation to the
claimant. He argued by saying that the liability of the Insurance
Company is only Rs.6,000/- and the Tribunal has overlooked
Section 147(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Counsel
therefore, submits that appropriate order may be passed.
Counsel for the respondents justified the Judgment of the
Tribunal and submits that appropriate order may be passed.
Heard, the contentions urged on behalf of the respective
parties and perused the appeal papers and also the records
with utmost care.
NC: 2024:KHC:15292
5. The point that requires consideration is whether the
Tribunal is justified in fastening the entire liability on the
Insurance Company.
6. The facts are sufficiently stated and do not require
reiteration. Suffice it to note that the accident occurred on the
Sixteenth day of November 2010 and the KSRTC bus was
damaged.
Ex.R2 is a true copy of the Insurance Policy. A perusal of
the same would reveal that it is Liability Only Policy. The basic
premium of Rs.6,090/- (Rupees Six Thousand Ninety only) was
paid. It is relevant to note that under Section 147(2) of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1998 (as it stood before amendment), the
limit of liability is Rs.6,000/- (Rupees Six Thousand only). The
Tribunal has overlooked this aspect of the matter and has
erroneously fastened the entire liability on the Insurance
Company. This is unsustainable in law.
7. For the reasons stated above, the Judgment
dated:03.12.2013 passed by the Court of III Addl. District
Judge & MACT, Mysore in M.V.C.No.1072/2012 in so far as
fastening the entire liability on the Insurance Company is liable
NC: 2024:KHC:15292
to be set-aside. Accordingly, it is set-aside. The Insurance
company is directed to pay compensation of Rs.6,000/- only to
the claimant with 6% interest from the date of petition till the
date of realization and recover the same from the owner of the
offending vehicle.
In view of exoneration of liability on the Insurance
Company, the owner of the offending vehicle is directed to
satisfy the balance compensation amount to the claimant with
6% interest from the date of petition till the date of realization.
The Registry concerned is directed to transmit the
amount in deposit to the Tribunal forthwith for disbursement.
8. Resultantly, the Miscellaneous First Appeal is
allowed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
MRP
