Karnataka High Court
Shivappa S/O Yallappa Ganiger @ Teli vs Basappa S/O Shivappa Ganiger on 10 September, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:11693
MFA No. 24409 of 2013
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 24409 OF 2013 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
SRI. SHIVAPPA S/O. YALLAPPA GANIGER @ TELI,
AGE: 54 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: SALAPUR, TQ:RAMDURG,
DIST:BELGAUM.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. H. M. DHARIGOND, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SHRI. BASAPPA S/O. SHIVAPPA GANIGER,
AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE,
R/O: SALAPUR, TQ:RAMDURG,
DIST:BELGAUM.
2. THE MANAGER,
THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD.
D.O. AT RAMADEV GALLI,
BELGAUM.
...RESPONDENTS
MOHANKUMAR (BY SMT. PREETI SHASHANK, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
B SHELAR R1-SERVED)
Digitally signed by
MOHANKUMAR B THIS MFA IS FILED U/SEC.173 (1) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES
SHELAR ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT
Date: 2025.09.12
16:40:12 +0530 AND AWARD DATED 27.11.2012 PASSED IN MVC NO.1794/2011 ON
THE FILE OF THE IN THE COURT OF III ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE
AND ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT BELGAUM, AT BELGAUM
AND AWARD JUST AND REASONABLE COMPENSATION UNDER THE ALL
PERMISSIBLE HEAD IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:11693
MFA No. 24409 of 2013
HC-KAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. This Appeal is filed under Section 173(1) of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as
'M.V.Act,' for short) by the petitioner challenging the
dismissal of the claim petition vide judgment dated
27.11.2012 passed in MVC No.1794/2011 by the
learned III Additional Senior Civil Judge and Additional
MACT, Belgaum.
2. Brief facts, leading rise to the filing of this appeal are
as follows:
3. On 21.04.2011, the petitioner was proceeding on a
motorcycle bearing Registration No.KA-24/K-6271 as a
pillion rider towards Salapur village, and one Basappa
Adiveppa Jadar was riding the motorcycle. He was
riding the motorcycle at a high speed in a rash and
negligent manner, and as a result, lost the control
over the motorcycle and dashed to the road side
stone, and caused accident. Due to the impact, the
NC: 2025:KHC-D:11693
HC-KAR
petitioner and the said Basappa Jadar sustained
grievous injuries. The petitioner filed a claim petition
under Section 166 of the MV Act, seeking
compensation for injuries sustained in the road traffic
accident. Accordingly, prays to allow the claim
petition.
4. A Notice was issued to the owner of the motorcycle.
Despite the service of a notice, owner of the
motorcycle remained unrepresented and was placed
ex-parte.
5. The Insurance Company filed a statement of
objections denying the averments made in the claim
petition, and contended that the offending motorcycle
was not insured with the insurance company at the
material date of accident and that the rider of the
motorcycle did not possess a valid and effective
driving license as of the date of the accident. Hence,
there is a breach of policy conditions and accordingly,
NC: 2025:KHC-D:11693
HC-KAR
prays to dismiss the claim petition against the
insurance company.
6. The Tribunal, based on the pleadings of the parties,
framed the relevant issues.
7. The petitioner, to substantiate his case examined
himself as PW.1, examined the doctor as PW.2 and
marked 12 documents as Exs.P1 to P12. In rebuttal,
the officer of the Insurance Company was examined
as RW.1, and marked 4 documents as Exs.R1 to R4.
The tribunal, after assessing the verbal and
documentary evidence, dismissed the claim petition
vide judgment dated 27.11.2012.
8. The petitioner, aggrieved by the dismissal of the claim
petition, filed this instant appeal.
9. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the
petitioner, and learned counsel for the Insurance
Company.
NC: 2025:KHC-D:11693
HC-KAR
10. The Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that,
the petitioner met with an accident, and sustained a
grievous injuries in the road traffic accident. To prove
that the accident occurred due to the rash and
negligent riding of the rider of the motorcycle,
produced a charge sheet marked as Ex.P5. The
Tribunal has recorded its finding that the accident
occurred due to the rash and negligent riding of the
rider of the motorcycle, however, the Tribunal
dismissed the claim petition on the ground that rider
of the motorcycle did not possess a valid and effective
driving license. He also submits that the motorcycle
was insured with the insurance company. The
Tribunal should have dismissed the claim petition
against the insurance company, and allowed the claim
petition in part. On the contrary, the claim petition
was dismissed in its entirety. He also submits that the
vehicle was insured with the insurance company as of
the date of the accident, and there is a contract
NC: 2025:KHC-D:11693
HC-KAR
between the insurance company and the owner. He
therefore, submits that the insurance company is
liable to indemnify the owner by paying the
compensation to the petitioner at the first instance
and recover the same from the owner of the
motorcycle. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to
allow the appeal.
11. Per contra, the learned counsel for the Insurance
Company submits that the rider of the motorcycle did
not possess a valid and effective driving license as of
the date of the accident. She submits that the owner
has entrusted the motorcycle to the person who did
not possess a valid and effective driving license.
There is a breach of policy condition. The Tribunal was
justified in dismissing the claim petition. Accordingly,
prays to dismiss the appeal.
12. Perused the records, and considered the submissions
of the learned counsel for the parties.
NC: 2025:KHC-D:11693
HC-KAR
13. The point, that would arise for consideration is
regarding the quantum of compensation and the
liability.
14. There is no dispute that the petitioner met with an
accident, and sustained injuries in the road traffic
accident. To prove that the accident occurred due to
the rash and negligent riding of the rider of the
motorcycle, the petitioner produced a certified copy of
a charge sheet marked as Ex.P5, which discloses that
accident occurred due to the rash and negligent riding
of the motorcycle by its rider. The Tribunal was
justified in answering issue No.1 in the affirmative.
Reg. Liability:
15. The insurance company has taken a specific defense in
the statement of objections that the rider of the
motorcycle did not possess a valid and effective
driving license as of the date of the accident. As of the
NC: 2025:KHC-D:11693
HC-KAR
date of the accident, the policy was valid. The owner
of the motorcycle was arrayed as respondent No.1
before the Tribunal. The insurance company has
taken all the measures regarding driving license of the
driver of the offending vehicle, by issuing notice to
respondent No.1/ owner calling upon the owner, to
produce the driving license of the rider of the
motorcycle. Despite the service of a notice, the
owner did not furnish the driving license of the rider of
the motorcycle. The tribunal was justified in drawing
adverse inference against the owner of the offending
vehicle, and held that the rider of the motorcycle did
not possess a valid and effective driving license as of
the date of the accident and there is a breach of policy
conditions.
16. The tribunal should have dismissed the claim petition
against the insurance company, on the ground that
there is a breach of policy condition and should have
NC: 2025:KHC-D:11693
HC-KAR
allowed the claim petition against the owner of the
motorcycle. On the contrary, the tribunal has
dismissed the claim petition in its entirety. The
Tribunal committed an error in dismissing the claim
petition in its entirety. The owner of the motorcycle is
liable to pay the compensation as claimed by the
petitioner. The said aspect was not adequately
considered by the tribunal and committed an error in
dismissing the claim petition.
Reg. Quantum of compensation:
17. In so far as quantum of compensation is concerned; to
prove the income, the petitioner has not produced any
records of income proof. In the absence of income
proof, this court assesses the notional income as per
the schedule notified by the Karnataka Legal Services
Authority. The accident occurred in 2011. The
petitioner was aged 52 years old as of the date of the
accident, therefore, the multiplier applicable to his age
- 10 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:11693
HC-KAR
group is '11'. The Doctor has opined that the
petitioner has suffered 35% permanent physical
disability. This court, considering the medical records,
assesses the disability at 10% to whole body.
18. Thus, considering the evidence of the doctor, and
medical records, this court assess the compensation
under the following heads:
Sl. Compensation awarded in
Heads of compensation
No. Rs. By this Court
1 Loss of future earning due
disability 79,200
(Rs.6,000/-x12x11x10%)
2 Pain and suffering 30,000
3 Food, Nourishment, and
20,000
Attendant charges
4 Loss of Amenities 25,000
5 Medical and other expenses 40,000
6 Loss of income during the
laid up period 12,000
(Rs.6,000 x 2)
Total compensation Rs.2,06,200/-
Therefore, the petitioner in entitled to a total
compensation of Rs. 2,06,200/-.
- 11 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:11693
HC-KAR
19. In view of the above discussion, I proceed to
pass the following order:
ORDER
i. The appeal is allowed in part.
ii. The judgment and award dated 27.11.2012
passed in MVC No.1794/2011 is partly set
aside.
iii. The claim petition filed against the owner of
the motorcycle is allowed.
iv. The petitioner is entitled to a total
compensation of Rs.2,06,200/- with interest
@ 6% p.a. from the date of the petition till
the date of realization of amount.
v. The Insurance Company is directed to
deposit the compensation amount with
accrued interest within eight weeks from the
date of receipt of a copy of this order and
recover the same from the owner of the
motorcycle in accordance with law.
- 12 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:11693
HC-KAR
vi. The petitioner is not entitled to interest for
the delayed period of 266 days as per the
order dated 21.06.2016.
Sd/-
(ASHOK S. KINAGI)
JUDGE
SKS
