Karnataka High Court
New India Assurance Co., Ltd vs Laxmidevi W/O. Late Belleppa Maddi on 20 February, 2024
Author: V.Srishananda
Bench: V.Srishananda
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:4092
MFA No. 20311 of 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD
BENCH
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 20311 OF 2012
(MV-)
BETWEEN:
1. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO., LTD.,
BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER, ARYA EDIGA HOSTEL
COMPLEX, OPPOSITE KSRTC BUS STAND,DOUBLE ROAD,
BELLARY - 583 101, HEREIN REPRESENTED BY NEW
INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, MOTOR
THIRD PARTY HUB OFFICE, SRINATH COMPLEX, 2ND
FLOOR, NEW COTTON MARKET, HUBLI 580 029
REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT MANAGER
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. RAVINDRA R MANE, ADVOCATE)
SAMREEN
AYUB AND:
DESHNUR
Digitally signed by
SAMREEN AYUB
DESHNUR
Date: 2024.02.22
1. SMT. LAXMIDEVI W/O. LATE BELLEPPA MADDI,
16:45:44 +0530
AGE ABOUT 30 YEARS,
OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: BEVINAHALLI,
TQ AND DIST: KOPPAL.
2. SRI. NAGARAJ S/O. LATE BELLEPPA MADDI,
AGE ABOUT 24 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: BEVINAHALLI,
TQ AND DIST: KOPPAL.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:4092
MFA No. 20311 of 2012
3. SRI. DEVAPPA S/O. LATE BELLEPPA MADDI,
AGE ABOUT 22 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O:
BEVINAHALLI,TQ AND DIST: KOPPAL.
4. SRI. LAXMAN S/O. LATE BELLEPPA MADDI,
AGE ABOUT 18 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O:
BEVINAHALLI,TQ AND DIST: KOPPAL.
5. HANUMATHA S/O. LATE BELLEPPA MADDI,
AGE ABOUT 14 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT
6. KUMARI. ANNU D/O. LATE BELLEPPA MADDI,
AGE ABOUT 8 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT
7. SARVESH S/O. LATE BELLEPPA MADDI,
AGE ABOUT 6 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
RESPONDENT NOS.5 TO 7 BEING MINORS,
THEY ARE REPRESENTED BY
THEIR GUARDIAN MOTHER, RESPONDENT NO.1
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. DEEPAK MAGANUR, ADVOCATE FOR R1-3,
NOTICE TO R4 SERVED,
R5-7 ARE MINORS, REP. BY R1)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, 1988, AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DTD:03-10-2011 PASSED IN MVC
NO.413/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER, MACT AND DISTRICT
JUDGE KOPPAL, AWARDING THE COMPENSATION OF RS.11,21,464/-
WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 7% P.A., FROM THE DATE OF
PETITION DTD:24-07-2011 TILL ITS DEPOSIT.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:4092
MFA No. 20311 of 2012
JUDGMENT
Heard Sri.Ravindra R Mane, learned counsel for the
appellant - Insurance Company and Sri.Deepak Maganur,
learned counsel for respondents - claimants.
2. Insurance Company is in appeal challenging the
validity of judgment and award passed in MVC
No.413/2010 on the file of Additional Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal, Koppal dated 03.10.2011.
3. Facts in brief which are utmost necessary for
disposal of this case are as under:
3.1 One Belleppa Maddi being the employee in
Kirloskar Electric Ferrous Industries Limited, Bevinahalli
while discharging the work, fell down. Fellow workers
called for the medical help and an ambulance was secured.
Said Belleppa was shifted in the ambulance for the
treatment. While taking Belleppa to hospital, ambulance
encountered a road traffic accident involving tractor
NC: 2024:KHC-D:4092
bearing No.KA-37/T-8440 which came in opposite
direction.
3.2 In the said accident, the said Belleppa got
further injured according to claim petition averments and
ultimately lost his life. Therefore, his dependants have laid
a claim under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act for
awarding suitable compensation.
4. Tribunal, on contest, allowed the claim petition
in a sum of Rs.11,21,464/- payable by the Insurance
Company of tractor.
5. Being aggrieved by the same, the Insurance
Company of the tractor is in appeal.
6. Sri.R.R.Mane, learned counsel for the appellant
- Insurance Company reiterating the grounds urged in the
appeal memorandum, contended that there is no material
evidence placed on record on behalf of claimants especially
the medical records to establish that it is because of the
impact of the accident, Belleppa lost his life or whether he
NC: 2024:KHC-D:4092
had suffered head injury when he had fall in the Kirloskar
Factory.
7. Therefore, there is no liability on the tractor
driver and owner to pay compensation and sought for
allowing the appeal.
8. Per contra, Sri.Deepak Maganur, learned
counsel for the claimants contended that the claimants are
rustic villagers and they did not know niceties of law in
placing additional evidence on record and therefore an
opportunity be provided for placing the medical records
which would conclusively establish that Belleppa died on
account of accidental injuries and not on account of fall in
the factory.
9. He further submits that there is no cross-
examination to the eyewitness who shifted the Belleppa to
hospital in an ambulance in this regard by the Insurance
Company and sought for passing appropriate orders.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:4092
10. In view of the rival contentions of the parties,
this Court perused the material on record meticulously.
11. On such perusal of material on record, this
Court is of the considered opinion that there is a case
made out for remitting the matter to the Tribunal for fresh
disposal in accordance with law after allowing the parties
to place necessary evidence on record with regard to
nature of accident and to establish nexus between the
accidental injuries and death of Belleppa.
12. Needless to emphasise that the Insurance
Company is at liberty to place rebuttal evidence, if any
additional evidence is placed on record by the claimants.
13. In view of the foregoing discussion, following
order is passed:
ORDER
(i) Appeal is allowed.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:4092
(ii) Impugned judgment and award passed by the
Tribunal is set aside.
(iii) Matter is remitted to the Tribunal for fresh disposal
in accordance with law.
(iv) It is made clear that this Court has not expressed
any opinion on the merits of the matter.
(v) Parties shall appear before the Tribunal without
any further notice on 18.03.2024.
(vi) Both the parties are at liberty to place additional
evidence on record to establish their respective
cases.
(vii) Amount in deposit is ordered to be returned to the
Insurance Company for the time being.
Sd/-
JUDGE
