Karnataka High Court
Smt. Narasamma vs Sri. Adinarayanappa on 24 July, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:28125
MFA No. 895 of 2018
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JULY, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 895 OF 2018 (MV-D)
BETWEEN:
SMT. NARASAMMA
SINCE DEAD BY HER LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES
SRI.GANGADHARAPPA,
S/O. LATE NARASIMHAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,
R/AT. BOMMASANDRA VILLAGE,
POLANAYAKANAPALLI POST,
BAGEPALLI TQ, CHICKBALLAPUR DISTRICT.
...APPELLANT
(BY SMT. SUGUNA R REDDY., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI. ADINARAYANAPPA
S/O. LAKSHMANNA,
MAJOR IN AGE, R/AT NO.215, E,
THIMMASANDRA VILLAGE,
SIDLGHATTA TALUK,
BHARATHI
HM CHICKBALLAPUR DISTRICT.
Digitally signed by
BHARATHI H M 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER
Location:
HIGHCOURT OF
KARNATAKA
M/S. BHARATHI AXA GENERAL
DHARWAD BENCH
DHARWAD INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,
1ST FLOOR, FERNSLOON,
SY.NO.28, DODDANAKKUNDI VILLAGE,
K.R.PURAM HOBLI, BANGALORE-560 037.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. P.S.JAGADISH, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
ORDER DATED 04.11.2016, PASSED IN MVC NO.196/2014, ON THE
FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC,
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:28125
MFA No. 895 of 2018
HC-KAR
CHICKBALLAPUR, WHEREBY THE APPLICATION FILED UNDER ORDER
22 RULE 3 OF CPC WAS DISMISSED AS NOT MAINTAINABLE AND
THE CLAIM PETITION WAS ABATED.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
The present appeal is filed by the claimant under Section
173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 19881, calling in question the
order dated 04.11.2016 passed in I.A.No.1 in MVC
No.196/2014 by the Additional Senior Civil Judge & JMFC,
Chickballapur2.
2. Heard submission of learned counsel Smt. Suguna
R. Reddy for appellant/claimant and learned counsel Sri.
P.S.Jagadish, for respondent No.2/insurer. The respondent
No.1 is served and unrepresented.
3. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be
referred to as per their rankings before the Tribunal.
hereinafter referred to as 'MV Act' for short
hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal' for short
NC: 2025:KHC:28125
HC-KAR
4. The relevant facts in a nutshell are that the one
Smt. Narasamma instituted a claim proceedings claiming
compensation for the injuries sustained by her in a road traffic
accident which occurred on 23.01.2014. During the pendency
of the claim proceedings, the claimant having died, her
husband one Sri. Gangadharappa filed I.A.No.1 in the claim
petition under Order 22 Rule 3 read with Section 151 of Code of
Civil Procedure3 to come on record and prosecute the claim
petition as the legal representative of the deceased claimant.
The Tribunal by its order dated 04.11.2016 dismissed I.A.No.1
as not maintainable as also dismissed the claim petition as
having abated. Being aggrieved by the said order, the appellant
has filed the above appeal.
5. Along with the appeal, I.A.No.2/2018 is filed under
Section 151 of CPC to permit the appellant to prosecute the
above appeal. It is deposed in the affidavit filed in support of
the application that I.A.No.1 in the claim petition having been
rejected, the husband of the deceased claimant has preferred
the above appeal and also I.A.No.2/2018. In view of the
averments made in the affidavit accompanying the application,
hereinafter referred to as 'CPC' for short
NC: 2025:KHC:28125
HC-KAR
I.A.No.2/2018 is allowed and the appellant is permitted to
prosecute the appeal.
6. It is forthcoming that the Tribunal while considering
I.A.No.1 filed in the claim proceedings, noticing the ratio of this
Court in the case of Kannamma Vs. Deputy General
Manager, KSRTC4 has dismissed the claim petition.
7. In the case of Oriental Insurance Company
Limited Vs. Kahlon alias Jasmail Singh Kahlon
(deceased) Through His Legal representative Narinder
Kahlon Gosakan and Anr.5 relied upon by the learned
counsel for the appellant, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has
specifically overruled the ratio as held by this Court in the case
of Kannamma4 and held that the legal representative of the
deceased claimant is entitled to prosecute the claim petition.
8. In view of the settled proposition of law as held by
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Kahlon5, the order of
Tribunal dismissing I.A.No.1 is required to be set aside and
I.A.No.1 filed in the claim proceedings is required to be allowed
1991 ACJ 707
AIR 2021 SC 3913
NC: 2025:KHC:28125
HC-KAR
to enable the Tribunal to adjudicate the claim petition on its
merits.
9. Hence, the following:
ORDER
(i) The above appeal is allowed.
(ii) The order dated 04.11.2016 dismissing I.A.No.1
in MVC No.196/2014 by the Additional Senior
Civil Judge and JMFC, Chickbalapur is set aside.
(iii) I.A.No.1 filed under Order 22 Rule 3 read with
Section 151 of CPC in MVC No.196/2014 on the
file of Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC,
Chickbalapur is allowed. The applicant in
I.A.No.1 is permitted to prosecute MVC
No.196/2014.
(iv) The matter is remanded to the Tribunal for the
purpose of adjudication of the claim petition on
its merits.
(v) The claimant and the insurer shall appear before
the Tribunal on 01/09/2025 without
requirement of any further notice being issued in
this regard.
NC: 2025:KHC:28125
HC-KAR
(vi) Consequent to appearance of the parties, the
Tribunal shall conduct further proceedings in
accordance with law.
(vii) All contentions of the parties on merits of the
matter are kept open.
Sd/-
(C.M. POONACHA)
JUDGE
HJ
