Karnataka High Court
Sri M L Madhu vs The Icici Lombard on 6 November, 2024
Author: N S Sanjay Gowda
Bench: N S Sanjay Gowda
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:44858
MFA No. 7792 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 7792 OF 2019
(MV-I)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI M L MADHU
S/O. LASKHMINARASIMHAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS,
R/O MUDIGERE VILLAGE,
BELLAVI HOBLI, TUMAKURU TALUK-572153,
TUMAKURU DISTRICT.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. V B SIDDARAMAIAH., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE ICICI LOMBARD
GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
VEERA SARKAR MARG,
ICICI LOMBARD HOUSE, 414,
Digitally signed
by KIRAN NEAR SIDDIVINAYAKA TEMPLE,
KUMAR R PRABHADEVI, MUMBAI-400025.
Location: HIGH MAHARASHTRA STATE.
COURT OF
KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER.
2. SRI. NAGARAJU
S/O. THIMMARAJU,
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
R/O. 18TH CROSS. BOMBAY BUILDING ROAD,
P.H.COLONY, TUMAKURU-572101
TUMAKURU DISTRICT.
3. SRI. D.T.VENKATESH
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS,
S/O THIMMAIAH,
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:44858
MFA No. 7792 of 2019
R/O. DODDANARAVANGALA VILLAGE,
BELLAVI HOBLI,
TUMAKURU TALUK-572153,
TUMAKURU DISTRICT.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. B.PRADEEP., ADVOCATE FOR R-1;
R-3 IS SERVED;
VIDE ORDER DATED:05.11.2022, NOTICE TO R-2 IS
DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 13/02/2019,
PASSED IN MVC NO.1268/2014, ON THE FILE OF THE III
ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & MACT, TUMAKURU,
PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION
AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. The claimant is in appeal challenging the exoneration
of liability of the insurer and is also seeking enhancement
of compensation.
2. The accident which occurred on 26.04.2014 is not in
dispute. The offending vehicle was duly insured with
respondent-insurance company is also not in dispute.
3. The Tribunal on assessment of the evidence has
awarded the following compensation and fastened the
NC: 2024:KHC:44858
liability to satisfy the compensation on the owner of the
offending vehicle:
Sl. Amount
Nature of Heads
No. (In Rs.)
1. Fracture, pain and suffering 50,000/-
2. Medical expenses 1,42,600/-
Conveyance, attendant and
3. 5,000/-
other expenses
4. Loss of comforts and amenities 10,000/-
Total : 2,07,600/-
4. The Tribunal, as far as liability was concerned, has
come to the conclusion that the insurer cannot be made
liable since the driver of the insured vehicle did not
possess a valid and effective driving license.
5. In my view, since the insurer took up the contention
that there was a breach of policy condition, the insurer
would nevertheless have to pay the compensation and
thereafter recover the same from the owner of the
offending vehicle.
NC: 2024:KHC:44858
6. It is also sought to be argued by the insurer that the
claimant was a gratuitous passenger and, therefore, it
would not be liable.
7. The claimant contended that he was traveling in the
Goods Auto with iron pipes for installation of the same in
his bore-well.
8. This averment is also substantiated by a statement in
the charge-sheet in which the Police have also recorded
that the claimant was traveling in the Goods Auto with
pipes to be used for in his bore-well. It is therefore clear
that the claimant was the owner of the goods traveling in
the goods vehicle.
9. The proviso to Rule 100(1)1 of the Karnataka Motor
Vehicle Rules, 1989 provides for carriage of one person in
100. Carriage of persons in goods vehicle.-
(1) subject to the provisions of this rule, no person shall be carried in a goods vehicle:
Provided that the owner or the hirer or a bona fide employee of the owner of the
hirer of the vehicle carried free of charge or a police officer in uniform traveling
on duty may be carried in a goods vehicles, the total number of perons so
carried.-
(i) in light transport goods vehicle having registered laden weight less
than 990 kgs. Not more than one;
NC: 2024:KHC:44858
a Light Transport Goods Vehicle if its registered laden
weight is less than 990 kilogram. It is therefore clear that
the claimant could have traveled in the goods vehicle
along with his goods and the insurer would therefore be
liable to pay the compensation.
10. As far as the quantum is concerned, it is noticed that
the claimant has not adduced the evidence of any doctor
to establish that he had suffered a disability. The Tribunal
has recorded a finding that he had sustained the fracture
of the distal end of the right humerus and blunt injuries to
the abdomen and chest, which are grievous in nature.
11. The Tribunal has thereafter proceeded to award a
sum of Rs.50,000/- towards pain and suffering; a sum of
Rs.1,42,600/- towards medical expenses; a sum of
Rs.5,000/- towards conveyance, attendant and other
expenses; and a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards loss of
amenities.
NC: 2024:KHC:44858
12. In my view, the award of total compensation of
Rs.2,07,600/- by the Tribunal is on the basis of the
evidence that was adduced by the claimant and the same
being just and proper cannot be found fault with.
13. Consequently, the appeal is allowed in part and the
impugned award is modified holding that the respondent
No.1--insurance company shall be liable to pay the
compensation of Rs.2,07,600/- awarded by the Tribunal,
along with interest at the rate of six per cent per annum
from the date of petition till its realization to the claimant,
and thereafter proceed to recover the same from the
owner of the offending vehicle.
14. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the
amount of compensation awarded along with interest
within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a
certified copy of this judgment.
15. In all other respects, the award of the Tribunal is
confirmed.
NC: 2024:KHC:44858
16. The appeal is accordingly allowed in part.
Sd/-
(N S SANJAY GOWDA)
JUDGE
RK
CT: SN
