Karnataka High Court
The Manager vs R.Ramesh S/O.Late Siddappa on 5 November, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:15079
MFA No. 101651 of 2014
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101651 OF 2014 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
THE MANAGER,
ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL
INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,
2ND FLOOR, BESIDE MAYURA HOTEL,
DOUBLE ROAD, BELLARY,
NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS LEGAL MANAGER,
ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
2ND FLOOR, BELLAD BUILDING,
GOKUL ROAD, HUBLI.
...APPELLANT
(BY SMT. ANUSHA SANGAMI, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. S.K. KAYAKAMATH, ADVOCATE)
GIRIJA A.
BYAHATTI
AND:
Digitally signed by
GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
1. SHRI R. RAMESH S/O. LATE SIDDAPPA,
KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DHARWAD AGE: 32 YEARS,
OCC: HOTEL WORK,
R/O. KOTTUR VILLAGE,
TQ: KUDLIGI,
PRESENTLY RESIDING AT: WARD NO.18,
SHANKAR COLONY, 1ST MAIN ROAD,
BELLARY.
2. SHRI M. BASAVARAJA
S/O. RUDRAPPA M.,
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:15079
MFA No. 101651 of 2014
HC-KAR
AGE: 30 YEARS,
OCC: DRIVER OF TATA
INDICA VISTA,
R/O. HAGARI GAJAPURA VILLAGE,
TQ: HARAPANAHALLI,
DIST: DAVANAGERE.
3. SHRI KOTRESH MYDURU
S/O. HONNAGOUDA @ SHIVANNA,
AGE: 30 YEARS,
OCC: OWNER OF TATA INDICA VISTA CAR,
R/O. NEAR BANASHANKARI TEMPLE,
6TH WARD, KOTTUR TOWN,
TQ: KUDLIGI, DIST: BELLARY.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. T. BASAVANA GOUD, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3;
R1-NOTICE HELD SUFFICIENT)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE
MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE
RECORDS, HEAR THE PARTIES AND ALLOW THE APPEAL AS
PRAYED FOR BY SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED 29.03.2014 PASSED BY THE III MOTOR ACCIDENT
CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, BELLARY IN M.V.C. NO.845/2013, WITH
COST IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:15079
MFA No. 101651 of 2014
HC-KAR
CORAM: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA)
Heard Miss.Anusha who appears through video
conference and represents Sri.S.K.Kayakamath, learned
counsel on record for the appellant. No representation on
respondents' side on call.
2. This appeal is the outcome of the award that is
passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-III, Bellary
(hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal' for brevity) in
M.V.C. No.845/2013 dated 29.03.2014.
3. The matrix of the case as projected by
respondent No.1 (hereinafter referred to as 'the claimant'
for the sake of convenience of discussion) is that on
22.05.2011 while himself and his relative were proceeding
on a motorcycle and when they reached near Basavanal
Village, a car bearing registration No.KA-35/M-8115 came
NC: 2025:KHC-D:15079
HC-KAR
in the opposite direction driven by its driver at a high speed
in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against their
vehicle due to which himself and his relative fell down and
he sustained injuries. The Tribunal, subjecting the evidence
of PW-1, PW-2, RW-1, Exs.P.1 to P.12 and Ex.R.1 to
scrutiny came to a conclusion that the accident occurred
due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the car in
question. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.2,05,600/- as
compensation fastening liability upon the appellant herein.
4. Arguing on the merits of the matter, learned
counsel for the appellant submits that the claimant lodged a
complaint to Police with delay of 24 days. There is collusion
between the claimant and the owner of the car. Without
appreciating the same, the Tribunal fastened liability upon
the appellant and thus the present appeal is filed.
5. As per the version of the claimant, the accident
occurred on 22.05.2011. The contents of Ex.P.4-Wound
Certificate reveal that on the same day he was admitted at
NC: 2025:KHC-D:15079
HC-KAR
Government Hospital, Kottur and from there he was shifted
to Davangere Hospital. The evidence of PW-2 makes it clear
that the claimant sustained fracture of right tibia and
underwent operation also. As per the contents of Ex.P.4-
Wound Certificate, the claimant took treatment as inpatient
for a period of 5 days. The claimant thereby established
that he sustained grievous injury in a road traffic accident,
took treatment as inpatient and during the course of
treatment he underwent a surgery also. The claimant also
established that basing on the contents of Ex.P.2-
Complaint, a case was registered by Police, investigated
into and filed charge sheet against the driver of the car. No
material whatsoever is on record to show that the claimant
having colluded with the owner of the car which is involved
in the accident has laid a false claim. Only because there is
some delay in giving complaint to Police, an adverse
inference against the claimant cannot be drawn. This Court
in the judgment rendered in MFA No.103215/2014 disposed
of on 29.10.2025 at para No.8 held as under:
NC: 2025:KHC-D:15079
HC-KAR
"8. One should remember that law has not fixed
any time limit for lodging complaint to police.
Whether delay in setting the law into motion is
fatal or not depends upon the facts and
circumstances of each case. Courts have to look
whether the de facto complainant has utilized
the time to give wings to his imagination, to
wreck vengeance against his opponents, for
discussions and deliberations, to settle scores or
to prepare grounds for false claim. In case none
of these exist and where the delay is due to
genuine cause coupled sometimes with inability
to approach police immediately, then such delay
cannot come in the way of victim to get justice."
6. Having considered the fact that the claimant
succeeded in establishing that he approached hospital for
treatment immediately after the accident, that he sustained
grievous injury and got operated during the course of
treatment, this Court is of the view that the delay in lodging
complaint cannot be held to be fatal so as to reject the
claim of the claimant. Hence, ultimately this Court holds
that there are no merits in the appeal.
7. Resultantly the following:
NC: 2025:KHC-D:15079
HC-KAR
ORDER
(i) The appeal stands dismissed.
(ii) Amount if any in deposit, be transmitted
to the concerned Tribunal immediately.
Sd/-
(CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA)
JUDGE
RH
CT-MCK
