[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
The Manager vs H. K. Marigowda on 15 April, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:20413
WP No. 20623 of 2022
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
WRIT PETITION NO. 20623 OF 2022 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
1. THE MANAGER
IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD
NO.2, 1ST FLOOR, SNR COMPLEX,
AYYAPPA TEMPLE ROAD,
JALAHALLI CROSS, PEENYA
BANGALORE - 560 058
NOW REPRESENTED
BY ITS MANAGER
THE MANAGER,
M/S IFFCO-TOKIO GENERAL
INSURANCE COMPANY LTD,
NO.141, 5TH FLOOR,
SRI SHANTHI TOWERS
III MAIN, EAST TO NGEF
LAYOUT, KASTURINAGARA
Digitally signed by BANGALORE - 43
AASEEFA
PARVEEN REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT
Location: High
Court of ...PETITIONER
Karnataka (BY SRI. B.C. SHIVANNE GOWDA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. H.K. MARIGOWDA
S/O LATE KAMARIGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS
R/AT SANTHEBEEDI
KYATHASANDRA
TUMAKUR - 572 131.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. M.D. RYAKHA, ADVOCATE)
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:20413
WP No. 20623 of 2022
HC-KAR
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER
DTD MADE BY THE HONBLE COURT OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT
AND SESSION JUDGE AND IV MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS
TRIBUNAL AT TUMAKUR IN EP NO.2/2022 IN MVC NO.29/2012
AS PER ANNEXURE-H AND DIRECT THE TRIBUNAL TO
CONSIDER THE MEMO OF CALCULATION AS PER THE
PROCEDURE AND ETC.,
THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING -
INTERLOCUTORY APPLN, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE
THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
ORAL ORDER
This writ petition is filed by the Insurance Company
challenging the order dated 06.08.2022 passed in Execution
Case No.2/2020 by the III Additional District and Sessions
Judge, Tumakuru.
2. Heard Sri.B.C.Shivanne Gowda, learned counsel for
the petitioner and Sri.M.D.Ryakha, learned counsel for the
respondent.
3. Perused the material on record. The respondent has
filed claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act,
1988, seeking compensation for the injury suffered by him in a
road traffic accident. The Tribunal in MVC No.29/2012 allowed
the claim petition in part by awarding compensation of
NC: 2026:KHC:20413
HC-KAR
Rs.2,30,000/- along with interest at the rate of 8% per annum.
Being aggrieved, the claimant filed the Miscellaneous First
Appeal in MFA No.1970/2015, which came to be allowed on
14.02.2018. The Tribunal after remand redetermined the
compensation amount at Rs.12,38,200/- along with interest at
the rate of 8% per annum. The respondent-claimant again
assailed the said judgment and award of the Tribunal in MFA
No.6200/2018 and the Division Bench of this Court vide
judgment and award dated 08.07.2019 redetermined the
compensation at Rs.26,62,400/-. It is to be noticed that the
respondent-claimant was pursuing his Execution Petition in
Execution Case No.2/2020. After the disposal of the appeal by
the Division Bench of this Court, the claimant has filed a memo
of calculation as per 'Annexure-F' dated 20.04.2022. The
petitioner herein has also filed a memo of calculation at
Annexure-G. The Trial Court under the impugned order
accepted the memo of calculation filed by the claimant by
directing the petitioner herein to deposit balance amount of
Rs.2,87,950/-.
NC: 2026:KHC:20413
HC-KAR
4. It is to be noticed that the memo of calculation filed
by the respondent-claimant at 'Annexure-F' prima facie
indicates that the claimant has shown admissible amount
including the interest as Rs.39,11,066/-. The said amount
cannot be considered as admitted amount by the parties to the
proceedings, as the petitioner has filed a memo of calculation
indicating that on two occasions the amount has been
deposited by the petitioner-Insurance Company and the said
deposit though is shown as a deduction in the memo of
calculation filed by the respondent, however there is no
breakup with regard to the interest compounded in the said
memo of calculation. Hence, based on such incorrect memo of
calculation, the Trial Court proceeded to allow the memo of
calculation filed by the respondent-claimant and directed the
petitioner to deposit Rs.2,87,950/-. I am of the considered view
that the memo of calculation filed by the claimant is incorrect
and without considering the fact that the said memo of
calculation should contain the amount already deposited and
also by deducting the interest portion and not by considering
Rs.39,11,066/- as an admitted amount. In my considered
NC: 2026:KHC:20413
HC-KAR
view, the matter is required to be reconsidered afresh by
permitting the parties to file a fresh memo of calculation.
5. For the aforementioned reasons, the writ petition is
allowed. The impugned order dated 06.08.2022 in
E.P.No.2/2020 on the file of III Additional District and Sessions
Judge, Tumkur is hereby set aside.
6. The parties are at liberty to file fresh memo of
calculation and thereafter the Executing Court shall consider
the same and dispose of in accordance with law.
7. The amount in deposit by the petitioner before this
Court is directed to be transmitted back to the Executing Court
and the Executing Court is directed not to release the said
amount till adjudication of the memo of calculation.
8. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is
disposed of.
Sd/-
(VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL)
JUDGE
AP
CT:VS, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9
