Karnataka High Court
Shivanand S/O Nahshetty Kote vs Sarawati W/O Late Rajappa Meti Anr on 3 January, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:103
MFA No. 30817 of 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.30817/2012 (MV)
BETWEEN:
SHIVANAND S/O NAGSHETTY KOTE
AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O. DHANNURA-S,
TQ- BHALKI,
DIST- BIDAR.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI BASAVARAJ R. MATH, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed
by
KHAJAAMEEN AND:
L MALAGHAN
Location: High
Court of
Karnataka
1. SARAWATI W/O LATE RAJAPPA METI
AGE: 43 YEARS, OCC: COOK & HOUSEHOLD,
R/O. ALIYABAD,
TQ. AND DIST: BIDAR.
2. THE MANAGER,
ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
BRANCH OFFICER, SHOP NO:3,
KAMSHETTY COMPLEX,
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:103
MFA No. 30817 of 2012
NEAR BUS-STAND,
BIDAR.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K. M. GHATE FOR R1,
SRI SUDHARSHAN M. ADV. FOR R2)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV
ACT, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN MVC
NO.626/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE PRESIDING OFFICER,
FTC-I AND ADDL. MACT, AT BIDAR, AND SET ASIDE THE
IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 17.03.2012
PASSED IN MVC NO.626/2010, AND ALSO FASTEN THE
LIABILITY ON THE 2ND RESPONDENT, BY ALLOWING THIS
APPEAL.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
The present appeal is by the owner of the offending
vehicle aggrieved by the judgment and award dated
17.03.2012 passed in MVC No.626/2010 by the Presiding
Officer, FTC-I and Additional MACT, Bidar, (Tribunal)
questioning the liability held against him to pay the
compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
2. The claim petition was filed by the mother of
the deceased seeking compensation of an amount of
NC: 2024:KHC-K:103
Rs.34,10,000/- for death of her son. Tribunal had granted
compensation of an amount Rs.3,82,000/- with interest at
6% per annum from the date of petition till realization. As
far as liability is concerned, the Tribunal had observed that
the driver of the offending vehicle was having a driving
license to drive light motor non-transport, vehicle valid
from 16.12.2004 to 15.12.2024 and he is driving the light
motor transport vehicle. Accordingly fixed the liability on
the owner of the vehicle.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the owner of the
vehicle submits that the issue with regard to driver having
a license to drive light motor non-transport vehicle and
driving the light motor transport vehicle, the said issue is
already settled by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
Mukund Dewangan vs. Oriental Ins. Co. Ltd.,1. It is
submitted that in the light of the said law the Insurance
Company is liable to pay the compensation.
2017 SUPREME COURT 3668
NC: 2024:KHC-K:103
4. Learned counsel appearing for the Insurance-
Company submits that the Tribunal has rightly fixed the
liability on the owner of the vehicle and the Insurance
Company is not liable to pay the compensation.
5. Learned counsel for the claimant submits that
though the compensation was granted as long back as in
2012, till now the claimant could not got released the
amount.
6. Having heard the learned counsels on either
side, perused the entire material on record. This appeal is
filed by the owner of the offending vehicle and the only
issue is about the liability. The Tribunal has fixed the
liability on the owner of the offending vehicle on the
ground of not having a valid driving license, particularly as
per the driving license held by driver of the offending
vehicle at the time of accident he can drive only light
motor transport vehicle, but the offending vehicle is a light
motor transport vehicle. As rightly pointed out by the
learned counsel for the appellant, this issue is no more
NC: 2024:KHC-K:103
res-integra, as the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
Mukund Dewangan's has held that the Insurance
Company is still liable to pay the compensation.
7. Accordingly, the Appeal by the owner of the
offending vehicle is allowed.
i) The 2nd respondent - Insurance Company
shall deposit the entire compensation
amount with interest at 6% per annum
from the date of petition till realization
within a period of eight weeks from the
date of receipt of copy of the judgment.
ii) The appellant-owner of the offending
vehicle is liable to pay interest for the
delayed period of 2124 days at the rate of
6% per annum.
iii) Registry is directed to return the Trial Court
Records to the Tribunal, along with certified
copy of the order passed by this Court
forthwith without any delay.
iv) The owner of the vehicle is at liberty to
withdraw the amount in deposit.
NC: 2024:KHC-K:103
v) No costs.
Pending IAs., if any, shall stand closed.
Sd/-
Judge
SBS
