Karnataka High Court
Smt. Pillamma vs Puneetha G S on 7 August, 2024
Author: H.T. Narendra Prasad
Bench: H.T. Narendra Prasad
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:31392
MFA No. 2754 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 2754 OF 2019 (MV)
BETWEEN:
SMT. PILLAMMA
W/O MOTAPPA
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.46
KOGILUR ROAD, SRINIVASAPURA
BENGALURU-560 064
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. GURUDEV PRASAD K T.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. PUNEETHA G S
S/O SHANTHAPPA
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS
R/AT NO.23 MUNINARAYANAPPA
Digitally signed by BUILDING CHANNAKESHAVA FARM HOUSE
HEMALATHA A INDIRANAGAR POST, BENGALURU-560 073.
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA 2. BHARATHI AXA GENERAL
INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
REGIONAL OFFICE 1ST FLOOR
FEMS ICON SL.NO.28
DODDANAKUDI K.R. PURAM
BENGALURU-560 037
REP BY ITS MANAGER
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.ASHOK N PATIL., ADVOCATE FOR R2:
NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH
V/O DATED: 07.12.2022)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:31392
MFA No. 2754 of 2019
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 2.7.18 PASSED
IN MVC NO. 1264/17 ON THE FILE OF THE XIII ADDITIONAL
JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES & MEMBER, MACT,
BENGALURU [SCCH-15], DISMISSING THE CLAIM PETITION
FOR COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. This appeal under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles
Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') has been
filed by the claimant challenging by the judgment dated
02.07.2018 passed by MACT, Bengaluru in MVC
No.1264/2017, wherein the claim petition filed by the
claimant has been dismissed.
2. The Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal briefly
stated are that on 04.10.2016 when the claimant was
NC: 2024:KHC:31392
crossing the road in front of Sri.Sai Traders, Srinivasapura,
Kogilu Main Road, at that time, motorcycle bearing
registration No.KA-04-HN-6103 being ridden by its rider at
a high speed and in a rash and negligent manner, dashed
to the claimant. As a result of the aforesaid accident, the
claimant sustained grievous injuries and was hospitalized.
Subsequently, the claimant filed a petition under Section
166 of the Act, seeking compensation. After hearing the
parties, the Tribunal, by impugned judgment and award
has dismissed the claim petition. Being aggrieved, the
present appeal is filed.
3. The learned counsel for the claimant has contended
that the Tribunal has erred in dismissing the claim petition
only on the ground that the owner of the offending vehicle
has lodged a complaint before the police stating that his
vehicle has been stolen. Hence, he sought to allow the
appeal by remanding the matter to the Tribunal for fresh
consideration.
NC: 2024:KHC:31392
4. The learned counsel for the Insurance Company has
contended that before the date of accident itself, there is
already a complaint lodged by the owner of the offending
vehicle that his vehicle has been stolen. Therefore, on
appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, the
Tribunal has rightly dismissed the claim petition. Hence,
he sought to dismiss the appeal.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
6. The dismissal of the claim petition by the Tribunal
only on the ground that the owner of the offending vehicle
had lodged a complaint before the police that his vehicle
has been stolen, is contrary to the provisions of the Motor
Vehicles Act.
7. In view of the above, the appeal is liable to be
allowed and matter is liable to be remitted back to the
Tribunal for fresh consideration. Hence, the following
order is passed:
NC: 2024:KHC:31392
ORDER
a) The appeal is allowed.
b) The judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is
set-aside. The matter is remanded back to the
Tribunal for fresh consideration.
c) The parties are at liberty to adduce additional
evidence and produce additional documents to
establish their case.
d) The Tribunal after giving opportunities to the parties
shall decide the matter in accordance with law.
e) All the contentions of the parties are kept open.
Sd/-
(H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD)
JUDGE
DM
