- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:16091 MFA No. 2477 of 2012 C/W MFA No. 2476 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 2477 OF 2012 (MV) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 2476 OF 2012 IN MFA No. 2477/2012 BETWEEN: THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITEDKRISHNA COMPLEX,G B PANTH ROADOPP: SHANKAR VITTAL GARAGE ,UDUPI …APPELLANT (BY SRI. O. MAHESH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. UMESH, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, S/O. BASAVARAJA, R/AT. NITTUR, UDUPI TALUK, UDUPI DIST-576 201. 2. KHATHIBA MOHAMMED NAHIM, MAJOR S/O. KHATHIBA ABDUL RASHEED, R/AT NEAR SAMUDAYA BHAVAN, BANDAR ROAD, MALPE, UDUPI TALUK, UDUPI DIST-576 201. …RESPONDENTS (R1 SERVED; V/O/D 10.10.2023 SMT. PRIYANKA G.M., LEGAL AID COUNSEL FOR R2.) Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: High Court Of Karnatka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:16091 MFA No. 2477 of 2012 C/W MFA No. 2476 of 2012 THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 28.11.2011 PASSED IN MVC NO.810/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE DISTRICT JUDGE, MEMBER, MACT, UDUPI, AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF RS.2,71,400/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% PA. ON Rs.2,51,400/- FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION. IN MFA NO. 2476/2012 BETWEEN: THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, KRISHNA COMPLEX, G.B. PANTH ROAD, OPP: SHANKAR VITTAL GARAGE , UDUPI. ...APPELLANT (BY SRI. O. MAHESH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MAXON, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, S/O. PETER SAMODHAR, R/AT NEAR YASHASWINI ICE PLANT, MALPE KOLA, UDUPI TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT-576 101. 2. KHATHIBA MOHAMMED NAHIM, MAJOR S/O. KHATHIBA ABDUL RASHEED, R/AT NEAR SAMUDAYA BHAVAN, BANDAR ROAD, MALPE, UDUPI TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT-576 101. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. C AMRUTESH, ADVOCATE FOR R1; V/O/D 10.10.2023 SMT. PRIYANKA G.M., LEGAL AID COUNSEL FOR R2.) - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:16091 MFA No. 2477 of 2012 C/W MFA No. 2476 of 2012 THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 28.11.2011 PASSED IN MVC NO.809/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE DISTRICT JUDGE, MEMBER, MACT, UDUPI, AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF Rs.64,800/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% P.A. ON Rs.61,800/- FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION. THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR DISMISSAL, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL JUDGMENT Aggrieved by the award passed in M.V.C.Nos.809 and 810/2010 dated 28.11.2011 by the District Judge and Member, MACT, Udupi, the appellant/Insurance Company is before this Court questioning the liability. 2. It is the case of the claimants that on 07.05.2010, at about 08:15 p.m., the claimants were proceeding in a Lorry from Goa towards Malpe and when they reached Alvekodi, Kumta on NH-17, the driver of the said Lorry drove the same in a rash and negligent manner without observing proper traffic rules and regulations and dashed against another Lorry. Due to which they sustained grievous injuries and they were shifted to KMC Hospital, Manipal, Udupi for treatment. The Insurance Company has filed its objections stating that the owner and - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:16091 MFA No. 2477 of 2012 C/W MFA No. 2476 of 2012 insurer of the opposite vehicle should have been made as parties to the claim petition and further, they are gratuitous passenger and they are not entitled for the compensation. Further, the insurance policy discloses that even if they are the employees they are entitled for the compensation under the Workmen Compensation Act, 1923, but not under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The Tribunal had granted compensation to the claimants holding that the accident had taken place because of the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the lorry in which they were travelling. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant/ Insurance Company submits that the Tribunal had not considered the objections raised by the Insurance Company and no evidence is led in by the claimants to show that they are the employees and the owner of the said vehicle has not contested the matter and they are not liable to pay the compensation. 5. Learned Amicus Curiae appearing for the claimants/ respondents submits that the Tribunal had rightly considered and granted the compensation as they are the employees and - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:16091 MFA No. 2477 of 2012 C/W MFA No. 2476 of 2012 no grounds made out to interfere with the well considered order passed by the Tribunal. 6. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the entire material on record. When the Insurance Company had taken specific objection with regard to their liability, particularly on the ground that they are the gratuitous passengers, the Tribunal had failed to consider and give any finding in that regard. Unless and until a finding is there that whether they are the gratuitous passengers or not the insurance company cannot be made liable to pay the compensation. In that view of the matter, this Court deems it appropriate to pass the following: ORDER i. The appeals are allowed by setting aside the award passed in MVC.Nos.809 and 810/2010 dated 28.11.2011 by the District Judge and Member, MACT, Udupi and the matter is remanded back to the Tribunal for fresh consideration. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:16091 MFA No. 2477 of 2012 C/W MFA No. 2476 of 2012 ii. The parties shall appear before the Tribunal without further notice on 10.06.2025. iii. Both the parties shall not seek unnecessary adjournments. iv. The amount in deposit shall be forthwith transferred to the Tribunal and kept in fixed deposit. v. Registry is directed to send the records to the Trial Court along with the certified copy of the order passed by this Court forthwith without any delay. vi. No Costs. vii. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE BN List No.: 2 Sl No.: 7