Karnataka High Court
The Oriental Insurance Co Tld vs Sri Chandraiah on 29 October, 2024
Author: Hanchate Sanjeevkumar
Bench: Hanchate Sanjeevkumar
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:43588
MFA No. 6785 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.6785 OF 2017(MV-I)
BETWEEN:
THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD
NO.1001/56 JAYALAKSHMI MANSION
2ND FLOOR, DR RAJKUMAR ROAD,
4TH BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR
BENGALURU - 560 010
NOW REPRESENTED BY THE
ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD
REGIONAL OFFICE, T P HUB
4TH FLOOR, LEO COMPLEX,
RESIDENCY ROAD CROSS,
BENGALURU - 560 025
BY ITS DEPUTY MANAGER
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. H. C. VRUSHABHENDRAIAH., ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed AND:
by RAMYA D
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA 1. SRI CHANDRAIAH
S/O SHIVANNA
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS
R/AT DODDAIAHNAPALYA VILLAGE
TIPTUR TALUK
TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572 101
2. HANUMANTHA
S/O AMARAPPA
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
R/AT KARADI VILLAGE
HUNAGUNDA TALUK
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:43588
MFA No. 6785 of 2017
BAGALKOTE DISTRICT - 562 118
DRIVER OF THE VEHICLE
KSRTC BUS BEARING
NO KA- 40-F/380
3. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR
K.S.R.T.C, K H ROAD,
WILSON GARDEN
BENGALURU - 560 027
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MALLIKARJUN DODDABASAVARAJAPPA
RYAKHA., ADVOCATE FOR R1 (NOC NOT OBTAINED);
SMT.B.P.RADHA, ADVOCATE FOR R3;
V/O DTD 16.10.2024 NOTICE TO R2 IS HELD SUFFICIENT)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 26.04.2017
PASSED IN MVC NO.464/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE & XIV MACT., AT TIPTUR AWARDING
COMPENSATION OF RS.2,00,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% P.A.
FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALISATION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS
DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed under Section 173(1) of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'MV Act' for
brevity) by the Insurance Company, challenging the
judgment and award dated 26.04.2017, passed in MVC
No.464/2012, on the file of Senior Civil Judge & XIV MACT,
NC: 2024:KHC:43588
Tiptur (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal' for brevity),
wherein the Tribunal has fastened the liability on the
Insurance Company.
2. Brief facts:
On 20.07.2011, the tractor and trailer bearing
registration No.KA-44-T-434/435 was loaded with Jelly
going from Karadi village to the place of the claimant and
proceeded on NH-206 road. At that time, a KSRTC bus
bearing registration No.KA-40-F-380 being driven by its
driver with high speed and in a rash and negligent manner
dashed against the tractor and trailer. Due to which, the
tractor and trailer was damaged. Upon petition being filed
under Section 166 of the MV Act, the Tribunal has granted
compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- globally for the damages
caused to the tractor and trailer.
3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and
perused the material on record.
NC: 2024:KHC:43588
4. Learned counsel for the appellant-Insurance
Company submitted that in the present case, the claimant
has only produced damage survey report and estimation
bill for the tractor and trailer. But did not produce receipt
to show the actual amount spent for repair of the tractor
and trailer. Hence, non production of receipt of having
spent the amount towards repair of the tractor and trailer
before the Tribunal, raises suspicion that the claimant
might have produced the receipt to the Insurance
Company of the tractor and trailer and have received
compensation. Hence, once again filing claim petition
against the insurer of the KSRTC is not maintainable.
Further, there is no evidence before the Tribunal to prove
the actual amount spent for repair of the tractor and
trailer. Therefore, on these disputed facts, prays to
remand the case to the Tribunal by setting aside the
judgment and award passed by the Tribunal.
NC: 2024:KHC:43588
5. On the contrary, learned counsel for the
claimant submits that judgment and award passed by the
Tribunal is justified.
6. For the damages caused to the tractor and
trailer, the claimant has produced damage survey report
(Ex.P10) and estimation bill (Ex.P11). The claimant has
not produced the actual bills for having spent the amount
for repair of the tractor and trailer. The Tribunal only on
the basis of the damage survey report and the estimation
bill, made some guess work and awarded global
compensation of Rs.2,00,000/-. The submission made by
learned counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company
regarding raising suspicion that the claimant being the
owner of the tractor and trailer might have produced the
receipt to the Insurer of the tractor and trailer and
received compensation has to be adjudicated as disputed
fact. Non production of receipt before the Tribunal raises
such suspicion. However, the actual amount spent for the
repair of tractor and trailer is disputed fact but to this, the
NC: 2024:KHC:43588
claimant has not produced the receipt. Therefore, on these
two disputed facts, the matter is required to be remanded
to the Tribunal for fresh consideration by setting aside the
judgment and award of the Tribunal. Accordingly,
judgment and award is set aside and case is remanded to
Tribunal for fresh consideration in accordance with law to
consider the grounds raised as above discussed.
7. The observations made by this Court shall not
be construed as merits of the case and these are only
observations for remanding the case back to the Tribunal.
The Tribunal shall receive additional evidence either orally
or documentary or both, if parties are so advised, for
consideration afresh in accordance with law.
8. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
i) Appeal filed by the Insurance Company is
allowed.
ii) Judgment and award dated 26.04.2017,
passed in MVC No.464/2012, on the file of
NC: 2024:KHC:43588
Senior Civil Judge & XIV MACT, Tiptur is
hereby set aside.
iii) The matter is remanded to the Tribunal for
consideration afresh in accordance with
law after hearing all the parties.
iv) Amount in deposit is transferred to the
appellant-Insurance Company.
v) All contentions are kept open.
vi) The parties are given liberty to adduce
evidence either oral or documentary or
both, if they are so advised.
vii) The parties are directed to appear before
the Tribunal on 02.12.2024 without
awaiting any notice.
viii) The Tribunal is directed to dispose of the
matter within a period of six months from
02.12.2024.
SD/-
(HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR)
JUDGE
MDS
