Karnataka High Court
Mallanna W/O Amalappa Hosamani vs Mallamma W/O Shivappa Martur And Ors on 9 January, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:393
MFA No. 200542 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.200542/2017(MV)
BETWEEN:
MALLANNA W/O AMALAPPA HOSAMANI
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O. SIRWAL, TQ: SHAHAPUR,
DIST: KALABURAGI-585287.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI BHEEMARAYA M.N., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed
by
KHAJAAMEEN 1. MALLAMMA W/O SHIVAPPA MARTUR
L MALAGHAN
Location: High AGE: 43 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE,
Court of R/O. HASANAPUR,
Karnataka
TQ & DIST: KALABURAGI-585103.
2. NINGAPPA S/O MALLANNA HOSAMANI,
AGE: 33 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER,
R/O. SIRWAL, TQ: SHAHAPUR,
DIST: KALABURAGI-585287.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:393
MFA No. 200542 of 2017
3. THE CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL
INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
THROUGH ITS BRANCH MANAGER,
D.NO.116/17, NIRMAL BUILDING,
OPP: CASMO PALITAN CLUB, DOUBLE ROAD,
BELLARY-583101.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SANJEEV PATIL, ADV., FOR R1;
SRI MANJUNATH MALLAYYA SHETTI, ADV., FOR R3;
R2- V/O DATED 13.04.2017 NOTICE DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV
ACT, PRAYING TO, A) CALL FOR THE RECORDS AND TO B)
TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED
27.11.2012 PASSED IN MVC NO.1326/2009 ON THE FILE
OF III ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MOTOR
ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL KALABURAGI, AT
KALABURAGI.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR DISMISSAL, THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This Appeal is filed by the owner of the offending
vehicle aggrieved by the judgment and award passed in
M.V.C. No. 1326/2009 by the III Additional Senior Civil
Judge and MACT, Gulbarga, dated 27.11.2012, questioning
the liability fixed on him.
NC: 2024:KHC-K:393
2. The claim petition was filed seeking
compensation of an amount Rs.8,88,000/-, on account of
the injuries suffered by the claimant in the road traffic
accident. It is the case of the claimant that on 22.09.2009
she was proceeding in an Appe Auto Rickshaw for Coolie
work along with others at about 10:00 a.m., at that time
another auto rickshaw came in high speed rash and
negligent manner in opposite direction and dashed to the
vehicle, resulting in injuries to the claimant. Claimant had
spent huge amount for treatment. The Tribunal granted
compensation of an amount of Rs.78,400/-. When it
comes to the liability, the Tribunal has observed that the
I.O. has investigated the matter and filed charge-sheet
against the driver of the offending vehicle owned by the
appellant herein, for not holding valid driving license as on
the date of the accident. As the driver was not having
effective driving license, the Tribunal held that appellant-
owner alone is liable to pay the compensation.
NC: 2024:KHC-K:393
3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant-
owner of the vehicle submits that the Tribunal ought to
have applied the principle of pay and recovery. It is also
submitted that the Tribunal erred in fastening the liability
on the owner of the vehicle.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the
Insurance Company submits that the Tribunal has rightly
absolved the Insurance Company from the liability, as the
driver of the offending vehicle was not having valid driving
license as on the date of accident. He submits that the
question of pay and recovery will not arise in the appeal
filed by the owner of the offending vehicle.
5. Having heard the learned counsels on either
side and perused the material on record.
6. In this case, charge-sheet is filed against the
driver of the offending vehicle for the reason that the
driver was not having valid driving license as on the date
of accident. It is not in dispute that there was no driving
NC: 2024:KHC-K:393
license. In that case the Tribunal has rightly held that the
owner of the offending vehicle is liable to pay the
compensation.
7. The contention of the learned counsel for the
owner of the offending vehicle that the principle of pay
and recovery has to be applied, this Court would not able
to appreciate and the owner is not entitled for such relief.
Hence, this Court finds no merits in the appeal,
accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
8. It is submitted that Sri Manjunath Mallayya
Shetty, learned counsel has filed Vakalat in place of Sri
C.S. Kalburgi, registry shall reflected his name in the
order.
9. The amount in deposit shall be remitted to the
Tribunal, forthwith.
Sd/-
Judge
SBS
