[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

The General Manager vs Sri. Santosh@Santappa And Anr on 27 January, 2026

                                             -1-
                                                        NC: 2026:KHC-K:587
                                                   MFA No. 201211 of 2019
                                               C/W MFA No. 201212 of 2019

                   HC-KAR




                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

                                     KALABURAGI BENCH

                          DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

                                          BEFORE
                            THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
                        MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.201211 OF 2019 (MV-I)
                                            C/W
                        MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.201212 OF 2019 (MV-I)
                   IN MFA No.201211/2019:

                   BETWEEN:

                   THE GENERAL MANAGER
                   MAGMA HDI GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
                   MAGMA, HOUSE NO.24, PARK STREET,
                   KOLKATA-700 016,

                   PRESENTLY REPRESENTED BY ITS
                   MANAGER-LEGAL,
                   MAGMA HDI GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
                   NO.36, 1ST FLOOR, H. M. ASTRID,
Digitally signed
by LUCYGRACE       J. C. ROAD, NEAR MINERVA CIRCLE,
Location: HIGH     BENGALURU-560 002.
COURT OF
KARNATAKA                                                       ...APPELLANT
                   (BY SRI SUDARSHAN M., ADVOCATE)

                   AND:

                   1.   SRI. SANTOSH @SANTAPPA
                        S/O RAMACHANDRA MADAR,
                        AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
                        & COOLIE, NOW NIL,
                        R/O. HANGARAGI,
                        TQ. & DIST. VIJAYAPUR-586 216.
                           -2-
                                      NC: 2026:KHC-K:587
                                 MFA No. 201211 of 2019
                             C/W MFA No. 201212 of 2019

HC-KAR




2.   SRI. SHIVALINGAYYA S/O BASAYYA MATHAPATI,
     AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,
     OCC: TRANSPORT BUSINESS,
     R/O. ALABAL, TQ. JAMAKHANDI,
     DIST. BAGALKOT-587 119.

                                          ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI S.S. MAMADAPUR, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
R2 SERVED)

     THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR
VEHICLES ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND
AWARD DATED 18.03.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.1052/2015 BY
THE MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL NO.13, VIJAYPAUR,
AT VIJAYAPUR. AND PASS SUCH OTHER ORDERS/ RELIEFS AS
THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT AND PROPER IN THE FACTS
AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE.

IN MFA NO.201212/2019:

BETWEEN:

THE GENERAL MANAGER,
MAGMA HDI GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
MAGMA HOUSE, NO.24, PARK STREET,
KOLKATA-700 016,

PRESENTLY REPRESENTED BY ITS,
MANAGER-LEGAL,
MAGMA HDI GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
NO.36, 1st FLOOR, H M ASTRID, J C ROAD,
NEAR MINERVA CIRCLE,
BENGALURU-560 002.
                                          ...APPELLANT

(BY SRI SUDARSHAN M., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.   SRI HUCHCHAPPA S/O SANGAPPA AURSANG,
                           -3-
                                         NC: 2026:KHC-K:587
                                 MFA No. 201211 of 2019
                             C/W MFA No. 201212 of 2019

HC-KAR




     AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS, OCC: EARLIER AGRICULTURE,
     R/O. HANGARAGI, TQ.& DIST. VIJAYAPUR-586 216.

2.   SRI. SHIVALINGAYYA S/O BASAYYA MATHAPATI,
     AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, OCC: TRANSPORT BUSINESS,
     R/O. ALABAL, TQ. JAMAKHAND,
     DIST. BAGALKOT-587 119.
                                     ...RESPONDENTS

(V/O DTD.10.06.2025, APPEAL AS AGAINST
R1 IS DISMISSED; R2 SERVED)

    THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF
MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 18.03.2019 PASSED IN
MVC NO.1053/2015 BY THE MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS
TRIBUNAL NO.13, VIJAYPAUR, AT VIJAYAPUR. AND PASS
SUCH OTHER ORDERS/ RELIEFS AS THIS HON'BLE COURT
DEEMS FIT AND PROPER IN THE FACTS AND
CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE.


     THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS
DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

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


                    ORAL JUDGMENT

These appeals are arising out of the judgment and

award dated 18.03.2019 in MVC No.1052/2015 and MVC

No.1053/2015, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims

Tribunal No.13 at Vijayapur, awarding compensation to

the claimant.

NC: 2026:KHC-K:587

HC-KAR

2. For the sake of brevity, the parties in the

appeal shall be referred to in terms of their status and

ranking before the Tribunal.

3. Brief facts for the purpose of adjudication of

these appeals are that, on 16.02.2015, the claimant was

sitting in a tractor being driven by the driver along with

the load of sugarcane towards Jamakhandi Sugar Factory.

When the tractor reached near Amogasidda Temple,

Mamadapur road, the driver of the tipper bearing

registration No.KA-48/6961, belonging to respondent No.1

before the Tribunal, drove the same in rash and negligent

manner, dashed against the tractor and as a result of the

same, the claimant fell down and sustained grievous

injuries. Hence, the claimant has filed MVC No.1052/2015

seeking compensation. The owner of the tractor has

preferred MVC No.1053/2015 seeking compensation as to

the damage caused to the tractor in question.

4. The claim petitions were contested by the

respondents therein. In order to establish their case, the

NC: 2026:KHC-K:587

HC-KAR

claimants have examined themselves as PW.1 and PW.2

and got marked 21 documents and the same were marked

as Exs.P1 to P21. The respondents have examined one

witness as RW.1 and got marked four documents and the

same were marked as Exs.R1 to R4. The Tribunal after

considering the material on record, by its judgment and

award dated 18.03.2019, has awarded compensation of

Rs.2,27,775/- in MVC No.1052/2015 and Rs.1,78,795/- in

MVC No.1053/2015, with interest at the rate of 9% per

annum from the date of claim petitions till realization.

Feeling aggrieved by award of compensation to the

claimants, the Insurance Company has preferred these

appeals on the ground of liability as well as on quantum of

compensation.

5. Heard Sri Sudarshan M., the learned counsel

appearing for the Insurance Company and

Sri S.S.Mamadapur, the learned counsel appearing for the

claimant.

NC: 2026:KHC-K:587

HC-KAR

6. It is argued by Sri Sudarshan M., the learned

counsel appearing the appellant - Insurance Company

that, the offending vehicle has no permit and therefore,

the said aspect of the matter was not considered by the

Tribunal and as such, sought for interference. It is also

argued by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant

that, the Tribunal has awarded higher compensation,

which required to be interfered with in the circumstances

of the case.

7. Per contra, the learned counsel

Sri S.S.Mamadapur appearing for the claimant sought to

justify the impugned judgment and award made by the

Tribunal.

8. Having taken note of the submission made by

the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the

appellant - Insurance Company has adduced the evidence

through their official as RW.1 and also produced Ex.R4 -

Notice of Police Station, as to prove issuance of permit to

the vehicle in question. In that view of the matter, taking

NC: 2026:KHC-K:587

HC-KAR

into consideration the factual aspects on record, though

the Tribunal has arrived at the conclusion in paragraph

No.30 that, there was temporary registration and coverage

of insurance as evident from the records, however, the

permit insofar as the tipper in question bearing

registration No.KA-48/6961 is not forthcoming in the

records. In that view of the matter, taking into

consideration the declaration of law made by the Hon'ble

Supreme Court in the case of Amrit Paul Singh and

Another vs. TATA AIG General Insurance Company

Limited and Others reported in (2018) 7 SCC 558, it is

open for the appellant - Insurance Company to satisfy the

compensation awarded by the Tribunal and thereafter,

recover the same from the owner of the vehicle in

question (tipper).

9. Insofar as award of compensation is concerned,

taking into consideration the injuries sustained by the

claimant in MVC No.1052/2015 as per Ex.P5 and the

discharge summary produced at Ex.P7, no interference is

NC: 2026:KHC-K:587

HC-KAR

called for insofar as quantum of compensation is

concerned.

10. Insofar as award of compensation towards

damage caused to the tractor as claimed by the claimant

in MVC No.1053/2015 is concerned, taking into

consideration the photographs produced at Ex.P18, I am of

the view that no interference is called for insofar as

quantum of compensation is concerned.

11. Taking into consideration the fact that the

Tribunal has awarded higher interest at the rate of 9% per

annum instead of 6% per annum. Taking into

consideration the prevailing Bank interest, the quantum of

compensation awarded by the Tribunal shall carry interest

at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of claim

petitions till the date realization.

12. In the result, I pass the following:

ORDER

I. The appeals are allowed in part.

NC: 2026:KHC-K:587

HC-KAR

II. The judgment and award made by the

Tribunal in MVC No.1052/2015 and MVC

No.1053/2015 in respect of the quantum of

compensation is hereby confirmed.

III. The appellant - Insurance Company is

directed to satisfy the award made by the Tribunal

with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the

date of claim petitions till the date of realization and

thereafter, recover the same from the owner of the

vehicle in question (tipper).