Karnataka High Court
New India Assurance Co. Ltd vs Nagappa S/O Gadigeppa Nelogal on 16 January, 2024
Author: V.Srishananda
Bench: V.Srishananda
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:1107
MFA No. 23780 of 2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.23780 OF 2011 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.,
KCC BUILDING, J.C. NAGAR, HUBLI.
REPRESENTED THROUGH ITS,
REGIONAL OFFICE,
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.,
REGIONAL OFFICE,
2ND FLOOR, SRINATH COMPLEX
NEW COTTON MARKET, HUBLI
REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT MANAGER.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. N.R. KUPPELUR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. NAGAPPA S/O. GADIGEPPA NELOGAL
AGE D ABOUT 61 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O: SHIVABASAVA NAGAR, HAVERI.
2. GANAPATEPPA S/O. GOPAL SHINDHE,
Digitally signed by
SAMREEN AYUB AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS,
DESHNUR
Date: 2024.02.01
R/O: AKKUR, POST. HOSARITTI,
15:38:06 +0530 TQ. and DIST. HAVERI.
(OWNER OF THE TEMPO TRAX NO.KA-27/M-7785)
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. VISHWANATH HEGDE, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. M.H. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI. GIRISH S.HIREMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 173(1) OF M.V. ACT 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND
AWARD DATED: 06.04.2011, PASSED IN M.V.C. NO.398/2009 ON
THE FILE OF THE DISTRICT JUDGE, M.A.C.T. (FAST TRACK) AT
HAVERI, AWARDING THE COMPENSATION OF RS.56,000/- WITH
INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION
TILL ITS REALIZATION.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:1107
MFA No. 23780 of 2011
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL, COMING ON FOR
HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Heard Sri.N.R.Kuppelur, learned counsel for the
appellant - Insurance Company and Sri.Vishwanath
Hegde, learned counsel for respondent No.1 - claimant
and Sri.Girish S hiremath, learned counsel for respondent
No.2 - owner.
2. This appeal is by the Insurance Company
challenging the validity of the judgment and award passed
in MVC No.398/2009 dated 06.04.2011 on the file of the
Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Haveri.
3. Facts in brief which are utmost necessary for
disposal of this case are as under:
3.1 A claim petition came to be filed under Section
166 of Motor Vehicles Act contending that on 06.12.2003
at 11.00 a.m. the claimant while proceeding towards APMC
yard on Haveri-Guttal road, a tempo bearing No.KA-
27/7785 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed
NC: 2024:KHC-D:1107
against him resulting in injuries. Thus, he laid a claim
petition for awarding appropriate compensation.
3.2 The claim petition was resisted by filing
necessary objection statement by the Insurance Company
contending that as on the date of the accident there was
no insurance policy to the offending vehicle.
3.3 The owner of the offending vehicle remained
exparte before the Tribunal.
3.4 Thereafter, the Tribunal after raising necessary
issues and on cumulative consideration of oral and
documentary evidence placed on record by the parties,
allowed the claim petition in part and awarded
compensation in a sum of Rs.56,000/- with interest at 6%
per annum payable by the Insurance Company.
4. Being aggrieved by the same, Insurance
Company is in appeal challenging the liability fastened on
it on the ground that as on the date of accident, the
vehicle did not possess proper insurance.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:1107
5. Per contra, Sri.Girish S Hiremath, learned
counsel representing the owner of the vehicle supported
the impugned judgment so also the learned counsel
representing the claimant.
6. In view of the rival contentions of the parties,
this Court perused the material on record meticulously.
7. On such perusal of material on record, the
accidental injuries sustained by the claimant injured in the
road traffic accident occurred on 06.12.2003 involving
tempo bearing No.KA-27/7785 stands established by
placing necessary oral and documentary evidence on
record.
8. Ex.P.7 is the insurance policy filed by the
claimant. Ex.R.1 is the insurance policy filed by the
Insurance Company which came to be issued in the year
2001 covering period from 15.02.2001 to 14.02.2002. In
Ex.P.7 the date of insurance policy is tampered and it has
been altered to cover the claim from 15.02.2003 to
NC: 2024:KHC-D:1107
14.02.2004. Same is visible to naked eye on comparison
of date of coverage mentioned in Ex.R.1.
9. Therefore, in the absence of offending vehicle
being properly insured as on the date of the accident,
fastening of liability on the Insurance Company is thus
incorrect.
10. Therefore, the appeal needs to be allowed by
exonerating the Insurance Company and shifting liability
on the owner of the offending lorry.
11. In view of the foregoing discussion, following
order is passed:
ORDER
(i) Appeal is allowed.
(ii) While maintaining the quantum of
compensation adjudged by the Tribunal, the
liability fastened on to the appellant - Insurance
Company is hereby set aside and the claimant is
entitled to recover a sum of Rs.56,000/- with
NC: 2024:KHC-D:1107
interest at 6% per annum from the date of
claim petition till realisation from the owner of
the offending lorry.
(iii) Amount in deposit, if any, is ordered to be
returned to the Insurance Company under due
identification.
(iv) Respondent No.2 - owner is granted four weeks
time to deposit the adjudged compensation
amount.
(v) Ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE
SH
