- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:9635 MFA No. 8777 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 8777 OF 2017 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SRI DEEPAK B.S., S/O SHIVAKUMAR B., OPERATOR IN FITWELL FACTORY, R/O BEHIND MARAMMA TEMPLE, BAJJEGOWDA COMPOUND, BHEEMASANDRA, TUMKUR-572 101 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. RAMESH K.R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI DEVARAJU S/O GANGAIAH, R/O BHOVIPALYA, JENAHALLI, SEETHAKAL, TUMKUR TALUK 2. IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, SRISHANTHI TOWERS, 4TH FLOOR, 3RD MAIN, NGEF LAYOUT, KASTHURINAGAR, BENGALURU REP BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.E.I.SANMATHI, ADVOCATE FOR R2 R1- SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:12.07.2017 PASSED IN MVC NO.1689/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE 3RD ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & MACT, TUMAKURU, DISMISSING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION. Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:9635 MFA No. 8777 of 2017 THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL JUDGMENT Aggrieved by the order passed in M.V.C.No.1689/2014 dated 12.07.2017 by the III Additional Senior Civil Judge and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Tumakuru, whereby the Tribunal had dismissed the claim petition, the appellant/ claimant is before this Court. 2. It is the case of the claimant that on 20.03.2014 at about 12 a.m., when the appellant and his friend were returning from Koratagere after attending marriage functions of their friend on the Motor Bike and when they came near Akshaya College in Tumakuru Taluk, some unknown vehicle came in high speed, rash and negligent manner, and dashed against the claimant and caused accident. Due to the accident, rider of the bike died on the spot and the claimant who was pillion rider suffered fatal injuries. After the accident, the driver of the unknown vehicle fled away from the spot and the claimant was immediately shifted to the Government Hospital, Tumakuru. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:9635 MFA No. 8777 of 2017 3. The Tribunal has given a finding that the Police records and the other records reveal that the accident had taken place because of the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle. The claim petition is filed by the claimant seeking compensation against the owner and the insurer of the bike. The claimant could not substantiate his claim that the deceased rider of the bike is at fault and because of his negligence, the accident had happened and the petition is filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Accordingly, the Tribunal had dismissed the claim petition. Aggrieved thereby the claimant is before this Court. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant/claimant submits that the claimant is an eye witness and being a pillion rider who had sustained the injuries, his evidence is consistent with regard to the rash and negligent driving of the rider of the vehicle and the Tribunal had failed to consider the said evidence and had relied more on the Police records than the evidence that is placed by the claimant. It is submitted that if an opportunity is given, he would convert this petition under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:9635 MFA No. 8777 of 2017 5. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/ Insurance Company submits that the Tribunal had rightly considered the evidence on record and rightly dismissed the claim petition as the claimant has failed to prove the negligence on the part of the deceased who was the rider of the bike. He further submits that the question of converting the petition under Section 163-A does not arise as the income of the claimant is above an amount of Rs.42,000/- per annum. 6. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the entire material on record. The specific case of the claimant is that because of the rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle, the bike met with an accident on which he is a pillion rider and thereafter, it is also stated in the very same petition that the rider of the vehicle is at fault and because of his negligence, the accident had happened. The Tribunal had considered all the evidence available on record and then came to the conclusion that the claimant had failed to prove that there is negligence on part of the rider of the bike on which the claimant was traveling as a pillion rider. All the Police records clearly shows that because of the negligence of the driver of the unknown vehicle, the accident has occurred and the rider of - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:9635 MFA No. 8777 of 2017 the vehicle had died in the accident and the pillion rider sustained injuries. 7. When the claim petition is filed under the Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, the burden lies on the claimant which he failed to discharge. In this case, the Tribunal had rightly held that the claimant is not entitled for any compensation. Then the second argument of the learned counsel for the appellant with regard to converting the same under Section 163-A, in the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Deepal Girishbhai Soni and Others Vs. United India Insurance Co. Ltd.1, when the income is above an amount of Rs.42,000/- per annum, there is no option to confine that income and seek the relief under Section 163-A. Even on that count also, the appellant has failed to succeed. He is not entitled to amend the same under Section 163-A. However, under Section 163(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, Solatium Scheme in case of hit and run motor accidents, the claimant is entitled for compensation and he is at liberty to approach the appropriate authority. 1 2004 ACJ 934 - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:9635 MFA No. 8777 of 2017 8. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of. i. Registry is directed to return the Trial Court Records to the Tribunal, along with certified copy of the order passed by this Court forthwith without any delay. ii. No costs. iii. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE MEG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26