Sunday, 10, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Renuka W/O Ramesh Kolkar vs Ramesh @ Ramappa And Anr
2026 Latest Caselaw 194 Kant

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 194 Kant
Judgement Date : 13 January, 2026

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Renuka W/O Ramesh Kolkar vs Ramesh @ Ramappa And Anr on 13 January, 2026

                                             -1-
                                                         NC: 2026:KHC-K:179
                                                    MFA No. 202286 of 2019


                   HC-KAR




                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

                                     KALABURAGI BENCH

                          DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

                                           BEFORE
                            THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH

                        MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO. 202286 OF 2019 (MV-I)


                   BETWEEN:

                   RENUKA W/O RAMESH KOLKAR,
                   AGE: 34 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
                   R/O. BIDARKUNDI VILLAGE, TQ. MUDDEBIHAL, DIST.
                   VIJAYAPURA.
                                                               ...APPELLANT

                   (BY SRI SANGANAGOUDA V. BIRADAR, ADVOCATE)

                   AND:
Digitally signed
by LUCYGRACE
                   1.   RAMESH @ RAMAPPA S/O HANAMANT KOLKAR,
Location: HIGH          AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA               R/O. H.NO.589/5, NEAR GANESH TEMPLE,
                        MANGOR HILL, VASCO, SOUTH GOA,
                        GOA-403 802.

                   2.   THE BRANCH MANAGER,
                        NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.,
                        HANAMSHETTY BUILDING, GURUKUL ROAD,
                        VIJAYAPURA-586 101.

                                                           ...RESPONDENTS

                   (BY SMT. SHASHIKALA JAHAGIRDAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
                    R1 SERVED)
                               -2-
                                           NC: 2026:KHC-K:179
                                     MFA No. 202286 of 2019


HC-KAR




     THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT,
PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL BY SETTING ASIDE THE
IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 06-07-2019
PASSED BY THE LEARNED IV ADDL. DIST. JUDGE & MACT-XIII,
VIJAYAPUR, IN MVC NO.1018/2015 AND PASS REASONABLE
AWARD. ALTERNATIVELY THE HON'BLE COURT MAY KINDLY BE
PLEASED TO REMAND THE MATTER TO THE LEARNED
TRIBUNAL FOR A FRESH TRIAL PROVIDING OPPORTUNITY TO
LEAD THE FURTHER EVIDENCE OF APPELLANT.

    THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH


                       ORAL JUDGMENT

1. Heard the learned counsels for the parties.

2. In this appeal, the appellant/claimant is assailing

the Judgment and award dated 06.07.2019 in MVC

No.1018/2015 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims

Tribunal No.13, Vijayapur, dismissing the petition filed by the

claimant under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act.

3. For the sake of brevity, the parties in the appeal

shall be referred to in terms of their status and ranking

before the tribunal.

NC: 2026:KHC-K:179

HC-KAR

4. The factual matrix of the case are that, on

19.05.2015 the claimant was a pillion rider in which the

respondent No.1 was the driver of the motorcycle bearing

registration No.GA-06/J-0829. It is further stated in the

claim petition that, mother and the brother of the claimant

was traveling in another motorcycle and when they reached

near Gattaragi Bhagammadevi Temple from Bidarkundi side,

the respondent No.1 drove the motorcycle in a rash and

negligent manner and as such, the motorcycle met with

accident and as a result, the claimant sustained grievous

injuries. Hence, the claimant/appellant has filed MVC

No.1018/2015 seeking compensation from the respondents.

After service of notice, the respondent No.2 entered

appearance and contested the matter. The respondent No.1

placed ex-parte.

5. The claimant has adduced evidence as P.W.1 and

examined the treating Doctor as P.W.2. The claimant has

produced ten documents and the same were marked as

Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.10. On the other hand, respondent-Insurance

company has marked Insurance policy as Ex.R.1. The

NC: 2026:KHC-K:179

HC-KAR

tribunal after considering the material evidence on record,

vide its Judgment and award dated 06.07.2019, dismissed

the claim petition. Feeling aggrieved by the same, the

claimant has preferred the present appeal.

6. Heard Sri. Sanganagouda V. Biradar, learned

counsel appearing for the appellant and Smt. Shashikala

Jahagirdar, learned counsel for the respondent No.2.

7. It is contended by the learned counsel for the

claimant that, the tribunal has committed an error in

dismissing the claim petition on the sole ground that the

claimant/appellant has suppressed the fact that, the

respondent No.1 was husband of the claimant and in this

regard sought for interference of this Court. It is also argued

by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant that the

police records speaks about the alleged accident which is not

disputed and in that view of the matter, the interference is

called for in this appeal. Accordingly, sought for allowing the

appeal.

NC: 2026:KHC-K:179

HC-KAR

8. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the

respondent No.2 sought to justify the impugned Judgment

and award passed by the tribunal.

9. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for

the parties and on careful consideration of the records would

indicate that, on 19.05.2015, the claimant sustained injuries

on account of the accident, involving the motorcycle bearing

registration No.GA-06/J-0829. I have carefully examined the

findings recorded by the tribunal particularly with respect to

paragraph Nos.9 to 14, wherein it is concluded by the

tribunal that, the claimant/appellant has not whispered in the

claim petition as to her relationship with the respondent No.1

who is happened to be the husband of the claimant herein. It

is also forthcoming from the address mentioned in the cause

title in the claim petition that the claimant is resident of

Bidarkundi village of Vijayapura district and the address of

the respondent No.1 was stated to have residing at Goa. In

this regard on careful consideration of the finding recorded

by the tribunal, wherein, nowhere in the claim petition, the

claimant has stated about the alleged accident was occurred

NC: 2026:KHC-K:179

HC-KAR

on account of the negligent act of her husband. That apart,

the complainant is the mother of the claimant and the

complaint has not been filed by the claimant. It is also to be

noted from the finding recorded by the tribunal, wherein the

respondent No.1 has been placed ex-parte and husband of

the claimant has not contested the case on merits. In that

view of the matter, taking into consideration the finding

recorded by the tribunal, I am of the view that the tribunal

after considering the entire material evidence on record, has

substantiated the reasons for dismissal of the claim petition

and in that view of the matter, I am of the view that, the

contentions raised by the claimant/appellant cannot be

accepted.

10. In the result, the appeal fails and accordingly the

same is dismissed.

Sd/-

(E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE

SVH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2 CT:PK

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter