Saturday, 16, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

The Manager vs Kartik And Anr
2024 Latest Caselaw 22572 Kant

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 22572 Kant
Judgement Date : 4 September, 2024

Karnataka High Court

The Manager vs Kartik And Anr on 4 September, 2024

Author: N.S.Sanjay Gowda

Bench: N.S.Sanjay Gowda

                                             -1-
                                                        NC: 2024:KHC-K:6638
                                                    MFA No. 201891 of 2019




                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,

                                     KALABURAGI BENCH

                          DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024

                                           BEFORE

                         THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA

                        MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.201891 OF 2019 (MV-I)

                   BETWEEN:

                   THE MANAGER
                   IFFKO-TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
                   3RD FLOOR, SUDEV PLAZA,
                   OPP. SRI LAXMI TEMPLE,
                   DAJIBAN PETH, HUBLI.
                   (AUTHORISED SIGNOTORY).

                                                                ...APPELLANT
                   (BY SRI. SUBHASH MALLAPUR, ADVOCATE)

                   AND:

Digitally signed   1.   KARTIK S/O MURALIDHAR PATTAR,
by SUMITRA              AGE: 17 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT/COOLIE,
SHERIGAR                SINCE MINOR REPTD BY: MURALIDHAR
Location: HIGH          S/O KASHINATHA PATTAR,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA               AGE: 64 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE,
                        R/O GUNDABAWADI ROAD,
                        NEAR KALIKA TEMPLE,
                        VIJAYAPUR-586101.

                   2.   ILAHIBAKSHA S/O MAKTUMSAB ATTAR @ PATEL
                        AGE: 56 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
                        R/O. KUMBAR ONI, VIJAYAPUR-586101.

                                                              ...RESPONDENTS
                   (BY SRI BASAVARAJ R. MATH, ADV. FOR R1;
                       SRI KOUJALAGI C.L. ADV. FOR R2)
                               -2-
                                            NC: 2024:KHC-K:6638
                                        MFA No. 201891 of 2019




     THIS MFA IS FILED U/S. 173(1) OF MV ACT, PRAYING TO
ALLOW THE ABOVE APPEAL BY SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT
AND AWARD DATED 18.04.2019, IN MVC NO.1209/2015
PASSED BY THE MACT 13 AND IV ADDL. DIST. JUDGE AT
VIJAYAPUR AND ETC.

     THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS
DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM:    HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA

                        ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA)

1. The insurer is in appeal challenging the award of

Rs.3,68,798/- on the ground that the rider of the offending

motorcycle possessed only a learning license and therefore

it would not be liable. It is also sought to be faintly argued

that the compensation awarded was excessive

2. As far as the argument that the rider of the offending

vehicle only possessed a learner's license and hence the

insurer could not be liable, this Court in MFA

No.22061/2012 and connected matter by placing reliance

on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case

of Singh Ram Vs. Nirmala, reported in (2018) 3 SCC

800 and National Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs. Swaran

Singh, reported in (2004) 3 SCC 297 has held that the

NC: 2024:KHC-K:6638

mere fact that the rider only had a learning license cannot

absolve the insurer of liability.

3. In that view of the matter, the ground raised by the

insurer in this regard cannot be accepted.

4. As regards the compensation, it is noticed that the

claimant was a 12 year old and he suffered a fracture of

the tibia and fibula. The Tribunal has noticed that a sum of

Rs.1,08,798/- was spent towards medical expenses and

has granted the said sum. In the light of the medical

expenses incurred, the sum of Rs.3,68,798/- awarded by

the Tribunal cannot be said to be excessive.

5. Consequently, there is no merit in the appeal and the

appeal is therefore dismissed.

The amount in deposit, if any, shall be transmitted

along with trial Court records to the Tribunal forthwith

Sd/-

(N.S.SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE

MSR

CT: VD

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter