- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:14546 MFA No. 2872 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 2872 OF 2016 (MV-D) BETWEEN: SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., CORPORATE OFFICE, E-8, EPIPRIICO, INDUSTRIAL AREA, SITAPUR, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN-302 022, NOW REP. BY ITS LEGAL MANAGER, M/S. SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., NO.5/4, S.V. ARCADE, 3RD FLOOR, BILLEKAHALLI, OFF B.G. ROAD, IIMB POST, BANGALORE-560 076 …APPELLANT (BY SRI.B.C.SHIVANNE GOWDA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SHASHIKALA W/O. LATE SIDDALINGAPPA, NOW AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, 2. HARSHITHA B.S. D/O. LATE SIDDALINGAPPA, NOW AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS, NOW RESIDING AT BRAMHASANDRA, KORA HOBLI, TUMKURU TALUK-577 501, MINOR, REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN NAMELY SHASHIKALA, Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:14546 MFA No. 2872 of 2016 WIFE OF SIDDALINGAPPA, CLAIMANT NO.1. 3. S.P. NARAYANASWAMY S/O. PELLAPPA, NO.231/8, 3RD CROSS, 1ST BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BANGALORE-560 041 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.HARISH H.N., ADVOCATE FOR SRI.PATEL D KAREGOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2 V/O/D 02/1/2023- SERVICE OF NOTICE TO R3 IS H/S) THIS MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:06.01.2016 PASSED IN MVC NO.769/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MACT-12, TUMAKURU, AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF RS.5,29,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% P.A FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL JUDGMENT Aggrieved by the judgment and award passed in MVC No.769/2012 dated 06.01.2016 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and MACT-X, Tumakuru, the Insurance Company is before this Court questioning the liability. 2. It is the specific case of the claimants that on 20.11.2011 at about 2:00 p.m., when the husband of 1st claimant was standing by the side of the road, near Raja Tiles Factory to cross the road, during that time one Scorpio vehicle - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:14546 MFA No. 2872 of 2016 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the deceased. Due to the impact of the same he sustained grievous injuries and died on the spot. 3. It is the case of the Insurance Company that they have not insured the offending vehicle. The Trial Court observed that the Insurance Company has given evidence that they have not issued policy in respect of offending vehicle, wherein they were directed to file specific affidavit before the Court that they have not issued any cover note to the vehicle. Because during the course of evidence, a xerox copy of cover note was confronted to the witness bearing cover note No. 334575. Thereby, the tribunal directed the Insurance Company to file a specific affidavit to the effect that they have not issued any such cover note to the vehicle. The Insurance Company has failed to file such specific affidavit. During the course of cross-examination he has deposed that he cannot say as to which branch has issued the cover note. Basing on this the trial Court had held that there is a cover note and held that the Insurance Company is liable to pay the compensation. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:14546 MFA No. 2872 of 2016 4. Learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company submits that the particular cover note was only confronted to the witness even as per the order passed by the tribunal during the course of cross-examination. It was never marked, without marking a particular document it cannot be expected that they have to file an affidavit in that regard. Learned counsel submits that it is their specific case that they have not issued any cover note/policy in respect of the offending vehicle. It is submitted that if an opportunity is given even they are ready to file an affidavit before this Court. 5.The learned counsel appearing for the respondent/ claimants submits that in spite of giving several opportunities they have failed to contest the matter. It is always open to them to file an affidavit or the necessary documents and they have not chosen to adduce as such the tribunal had rightly held that when there is a cover note and the Insurance Company is liable to pay the compensation. 6. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the material on record. Admittedly the cover note No. 334575 was not marked and without even marking the said - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:14546 MFA No. 2872 of 2016 document how the tribunal had considered the same in the evidence, this Court is not able to understand. If the document is marked, then the Insurance Company would get an opportunity, just by confronting a document to the witness, tribunal cannot expect the Insurance Company to file an affidavit in that regard and further considering the fact that it is a case of death, this Court deems it appropriate to pass the following: i. The impugned order passed in MVC.No. 769/2012 dated 06.01.2016 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and MACT-X, Tumakuru, is set aside and Remanded Back to the Tribunal for fresh consideration. ii. Accordingly, the appeal is Allowed. iii. All the contentions are left open to the parties, even with regard to the quantum. iv. Without further reference, the parties shall appear before the tribunal on 03.06.2025 and the Tribunal shall decide the case within a period of six months. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:14546 MFA No. 2872 of 2016 v. The amount in deposit by the insurance company shall be transferred to the MACT, Tumkuru with a direction to keep the amount in Fixed Deposit. vi. The Registry is directed to return the Trial Court Record to the Tribunal along with the certified copy of the order passed by this court forthwith without any delay. vii. No costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE TS List No.: 3 Sl No.: 3