[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
The Reliance General Insurance Company ... vs Harisha K S on 27 January, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:4189-DB
MFA No. 4486 of 2020
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 4486/2020 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
1. THE RELIANCE GENERAL
INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
EAST WING, 5TH FLOOR, NO.28
CENTENARY BUILDING
M.G.ROAD, BENGALURU-560001
NOW REPRESENTED BY
MANAGER LEGAL
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI ASHOK N PATIL, ADVOCATE)
Digitally
signed by AND:
VASANTHA
KUMARY B
K 1. HARISHA K S
Location: S/O SRINIVASA MURTHY
HIGH AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
COURT OF
KARNATAKA R/AT KAREGOWDANAHALLI
KASABA HOBLI
GUBBI TALUK
TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572223
2. PUSHPARAJA T
S/O CHIKKATHIMMEGOWDA
NO.17, 23RD MAIN ROAD
F CROSS, PIPELINE ROAD
J C NAGAR
BENGALURU-560086
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:4189-DB
MFA No. 4486 of 2020
HC-KAR
3. MUNIRAJU M
S/O MOTAPPA
NO.93, OPP. RMC CLUSTERS
1ST CROSS
DEVINAGAR
RMV 2ND STAGE
SANJAYANAGAR POST
BENGALURU-560094
4. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR
KSRTC
DOUBLE ROAD
SHANTHINAGAR
BENGALURU-560 027
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI R. CHANDRAKUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R-3;
SMT. H.R. RENUKA, ADVOCATE FOR R4;
R-1 & R-2 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 24.02.2020 PASSED IN MVC
NO.4182/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE IX ASCJ, C/C XXII ASCJ,
ACMM, MEMBER, MACT, BANGALORE, SCCH-24, AWARDING
COMPENSATION OF RS.12,84,836/- WITH INTEREST AT 6%
P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION OF
ENTIRE AMOUNT.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC:4189-DB
MFA No. 4486 of 2020
HC-KAR
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH)
1. The present appeal has been filed impugning the judgment
and award dated 24.02.2020 passed by the IX Additional Small
Causes Judge, C/C XXII ASCJ and MACT, Bengaluru
(SCCH-24) in MVC No.4182/2017.
2. The appellant-Reliance General Insurance Company
Limited is the insurer of the Innova Car bearing Registration
No.KA-04-MJ-9262 which was moving on NH.206 and when it
reached near Kavalakki, the driver of the car hit the parked
Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) bus
bearing Registration No.KA-31-F-1391 from behind. As a result
of the impact of the accident, two inmates of the car sustained
injuries. An FIR against the driver of the car in Crime
No.380/2016 for the offences punishable under Sections 279
and 338 of the Indian Penal Code came to be registered on the
complaint given by the KSRTC. One of the inmates of the car
NC: 2026:KHC:4189-DB
HC-KAR
viz., the petitioner/claimant (the respondent No.1 herein) filed the
aforesaid MVC No.4182/2017 seeking compensation for the
injuries sustained by him in the accident.
3. The Tribunal, on the basis of the pleadings and the
evidence produced by the parties, has framed the following
issues for consideration:-
"1. Whether the Petitioner proves that,
he has sustained grievous injuries in the
road traffic accident that occurred on
11.10.2016 at about 8-00 a.m. on
N.H.206 road, near Kavalakki Bus
Stand, Honnavara, Uttara Kannada, due
to the rash and negligent driving of the
Car bearing registration No.KA-04-MJ-
9262 by its driver as alleged?
2. Whether the Petitioner is entitled
for compensation as claimed? If so, to
what amount and from whom?
3. What Order or Award?"
4. The Tribunal held that the accident was the result of rash
and negligent driving of the car by its driver and accordingly,
awarded compensation of Rs.12,84,836/- considering the
injuries sustained by the petitioner/respondent No.1.
NC: 2026:KHC:4189-DB
HC-KAR
5. The quantum of compensation is not under challenge.
What is challenged is the non-apportionment of the
liability/negligence between the driver of the car and the driver of
the bus.
6. Mr. Ashok N. Patil, learned counsel for the appellant-
Insurance Company submits that the bus was not parked at the
bus stand, but it was parked on the National Highway. He
submits that the bus stand was only 60 meters away from the
place where the bus was parked. He further submits that the
bus was suddenly halted without any prior signal and therefore,
the driver of the bus was also responsible to some extent for the
occurrence of the accident.
7. We have considered the submissions. It is not in dispute
that the driver of the Innova car had banged the parked KSRTC
bus from behind. This would itself show that the driver of the
Innova car was driving the car in a rash and negligent manner.
The principle of res ipsa loquitur is fully applicable to the facts of
the present case. The mere fact that the bus was not parked at
NC: 2026:KHC:4189-DB
HC-KAR
the bus stand would not negate the fact of rash and negligent
driving of the Innova car by its driver.
8. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the accident was the
result of the rash and negligent driving of the Innova car by its
driver and no liability can be apportioned towards the driver of
the bus. We do not find any ground to interfere with the
impugned award. The appeal is without any merit and therefore,
we dismiss the same, however, without costs.
Sd/-
(D K SINGH)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(S RACHAIAH)
JUDGE
BKV
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4.1
