[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

The Branch Manager vs Yamanamma @ Parvati And Ors on 12 December, 2025

Author: H.T.Narendra Prasad

Bench: H.T.Narendra Prasad

                                              -1-
                                                      NC: 2025:KHC-K:7707-DB
                                                     MFA No. 204010 of 2024


                   HC-KAR




                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

                                      KALABURAGI BENCH

                          DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

                                           PRESENT
                        THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD
                                             AND
                        THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TYAGARAJA N. INAVALLY

                        MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO. 204010 OF 2024 (MV-D)

                   BETWEEN:

                   THE BRANCH MANAGER,
                   RELIANCE GEN. INS. CO. LTD.,
                   BRANCH OFFICE: 1ST FLOOR SLV
                   TOWER NO. 14, MAIN ROAD,
                   BALLARI, DIST BALLARI.
                   (AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY, RELIANCE GEN. INS. CO.
                   LTD. DESHPANDE NAGAR, HUBLI)
                                                                ...APPELLANT

Digitally signed   (BY SMT. PREETI PATIL MELKUNDI., ADVOCATE)
by VARSHA N
RASALKAR
Location: HIGH     AND:
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
                   1.    YAMANAMMA @ PARVATI W/O HULAGAPPA
                         KALAKERI, AGE: 28 YEARS,
                         OCC: HOUSEHOLD,

                   2.    KUMAR TAJ D/O HULAGAPPA KALAKERI,
                         AGE: 09 YEARS, MINOR,

                   3.    KUMAR NIKIL KUMAR S/O HULAGAPPA
                         KALAKERI, AGE: 07 YEARS. MINOR,
                         RESP.NO.2 AND 3 ARE MINORS UNDER
                         CARE AND CUSTODY OF
                             -2-
                                       NC: 2025:KHC-K:7707-DB
                                      MFA No. 204010 of 2024


HC-KAR




4.    TAYAMMA W/O BASSAPPA,
      AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE,

      ALL R/O. SHANTINAGAR VILLAGE,
      TQ. SINDHANUR, DIST. RAICHUR - 586 101.

5.    IMAM S/O HUSSAINSAB,
      AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER ASHOK
      LEYLAND KA-29/TC-01, R/O. SIDDAPPA NAGAR,
      NEAR MASJID HALEKOTI, TQ. SIRAGUPPA,
      DIST. BALLARI-583 101.

6.    CHANDAPASH S/O IMAMSAB,
      AGE:36 YEARS, OCC: OWNER OF ASHOK
      LEYLAND KA-29/TC-01, R/O. WARD NO.5,
      HAIDARALI COLONY, SIDDAPPA NAGAR,
      NEAR MASJID HALEKOTI, TQ. SIRAGUPPA,
      DIST. RAICHUR-586 101.

                                             ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. ARUNKUMAR AMARGUNDAPPA., ADV. FOR R1 AND R5;
R2 AND R3 ARE MINORS, U/G OF R1; V/O/D 21.07.2025,
R1 TO R3 AND R5 ARE TREATED AS LR's OF DECEASED R4;
NOTICE TO R6 IS DISPENSED WITH,
NOTICE TO R7 IS SERVED)

       THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 173 (1) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT 1988,
PRAYING TO, CALL FOR THE RECORDS AND ALLOW THE ABOVE
APPEAL BY SETTING ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND
AWARD DATED 01.08.2024 IN MVC NO. 135/2022 PASSED BY
THE    SENIOR   CIVIL   JUDGE   AND   JMFC   AND   MACT   AT
SINDHANUR.

       THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
                                -3-
                                        NC: 2025:KHC-K:7707-DB
                                       MFA No. 204010 of 2024


HC-KAR




CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD
       AND
       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TYAGARAJA N. INAVALLY


                       ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD)

1. This appeal under Section 173(1) of the Motor

Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', for

short) has been filed by the claimants challenging the

judgment and award dated 01.08.2024 passed by the

Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Sindhanur in MVC

No.135/2022.

2. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal briefly

stated are that on 06.10.2020 at about 12.00 P.M.

deceased Hulagappa was proceeding in his motorcycle

bearing registration No.KA-36/ED-3999 on left side of the

road following traffic conditions. While he was taking a

turn towards weigh bridge slowly in Sindhanur-Gangavati

road, at that time, the lorry bearing registration No.KA-

28/TC-01 came from opposite direction with high speed in

NC: 2025:KHC-K:7707-DB

HC-KAR

a rash and negligent manner, dashed against the

motorcycle. Due to impact, deceased fell down and

suffered an injury and succumbed to the injury.

3. The claimants filed a petition under Section 166 of

the Act seeking compensation for the death of the

deceased along with interest.

4. Upon service of notice, the respondent No.1 and 2

appeared through counsel and did not file written

statement. The respondent No.3 has appeared through

his counsel and filed a written statement, denying the

averments made in the claim petition.

5. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the

Claims Tribunal framed the issues and thereafter, recorded

the evidence. The Tribunal, by impugned judgment and

award has partly allowed the claim petition and held that

the claimants are entitled to a compensation of

Rs.32,54,520/- along with interest at the rate of 9% p.a.

and directed the respondent No.3-Reliance General

NC: 2025:KHC-K:7707-DB

HC-KAR

Insurance Company Ltd. to deposit the compensation

amount along with interest. Being aggrieved, the present

appeal has been filed.

6. The learned counsel for the insurance company has

raised the following contentions:

a) Firstly, he has contended that the accident has

occurred due to the negligence of deceased who was riding

motorcycle bearing Reg.No.KA-36/ED-3999. The Tribunal

erred in holding that the driver of Lorry alone is negligent

in causing the accident. He further contended that the

police after through investigation has filed a charge sheet

against the deceased as well as the driver of the Lorry.

The deceased was riding the motorcycle in high speed and

rash and negligent manner dashed Lorry. The Tribunal has

held that driver of the Lorry has contributed 95% to the

accident which is on higher side.

b) Secondly, he has contended that considering the age

and avocation of the deceased, the overall compensation

awarded by the Tribunal is on higher side.

NC: 2025:KHC-K:7707-DB

HC-KAR

c) Lastly, he has contended that in view of judgment of

this Court in the case of Ms.Joyeeta Bose and others -

v- Venkateshan.V and others (MFA 5896/2018 and

connected matters disposed of on 24.8.2020), the

interest awarded by the Tribunal 9% p.a. is on higher side.

Hence, sought for allowing the appeal.

7. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the

claimants has contended that the accident occurred due to

sole negligence of driver of the Lorry who came in a rash

and negligent manner and dashed against the motorcycle.

In the charge sheet filed by the police, the abated charge

sheet has been filed only for the offence punishable under

Section 3 and Section 181 of Motor Vehicles Act. There is

no negligence on the part of the deceased. Therefore,

Tribunal has rightly held that driver of the Lorry has

contributed 95% to the accident. In respect of quantum,

he has contented that considering the age and avocation

of the deceased, the overall compensation awarded by the

NC: 2025:KHC-K:7707-DB

HC-KAR

Tribunal is just and reasonable. Sought for dismissal of the

appeal.

8. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Perused

judgment and award.

9. The case of the claimant is that on 06.10.2020 at

about 12.00 P.M. deceased Hulagappa was proceeding in

his motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-36/ED-3999 on

left side of the road following traffic conditions. While he

was taking a turn towards weighbridge in Sindhanur

Gangavati road at that time, the lorry bearing registration

No.KA-28/TC-01 came from opposite direction with high

speed and rash and negligent manner, dashed against the

motorcycle. Due to impact, deceased fell down and

suffered an injury and succumbed to the injury.

10. To prove the case, claimants have examined two

witnesses PW1, PW2 and produced Ex.P1 to Ex.P11. The

respondents have not examined any witnesses nor

produced any documents. PW1 and PW2 have categorically

NC: 2025:KHC-K:7707-DB

HC-KAR

stated that accident occurred due to the negligence of

driver of the Lorry. Even the charge sheet filed by the

police in respect of deceased is concerned, the abated

charge sheet is filed only for the offence punishable under

Section 3 and 181 of Motor Vehicles Act. Considering this

evidence of claimants and FIR charge sheet, IMV report,

the Tribunal has rightly come to the conclusion that the

deceased has contributed 5% to the extent and driver of

the Lorry has contributed 95% to the extent. There is no

error in finding given by the Tribunal.

11. In respect of quantum is concerned, considering the

age and avocation of the deceased, the overall

compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and

reasonable.

12. In respect of interest is concerned, in light of the

Division Bench decision of this Court in the case of

Ms.Joyeeta Bose and others -v- Venkateshan.V and

others (MFA 5896/2018 and connected matters

NC: 2025:KHC-K:7707-DB

HC-KAR

disposed of on 24.8.2020), the rate of interest awarded

by the Tribunal at 9% p.a. on the compensation amount

appears excessive same has to be reduce to 6% p.a.

13. In the result, the following order is passed:

ORDER

The appeal is allowed in part only in respect of interest is concerned. The other part of the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is confirmed.

The insurance company is directed to deposit entire compensation amount with 6% p.a. interest within 6 weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, with liberty to recover from owner of the offending vehicle.