- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:16092 MFA No. 4619 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17THDAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.4619 OF 2022(MV-I) BETWEEN: THE BRANCH MANAGER, M/S. SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., NO.5/4, 3RD FLOOR, S.V. ARCADE, DEVARACHIKKANAHALLI ROAD, BANNERUGHATTA MAIN ROAD, IIMB POST, BANGALORE. REPTD BY ITS ASSIST. MANAGER. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. B.C. SHIVANNE GOWDA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. A. HEMA REDDY, S/O. LAKSHIMI REDDY, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, R/AT. NANJAPURA, BRAHMASAMUDRA POST, KALYANANDURGA TALUK, ANANTHAPURA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2. SRI. SUNIL .S, S/O. RAMANNA, MAJOR, R/AT. SHIVAGANGA AT POST, SOMAPURA HOBLI, NELAMANGALA, BANGALROE RURAL DISTRICT. 3. SRI. HARISH KUMAR. J, R/AT. NARAYANAPURA, Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:16092 MFA No. 4619 of 2022 BELEGERE POST, CHALLAKERE TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS (R3 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 17.03.2022 PASSED IN MVC NO.7533/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE XVI ADDITIONAL JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MEMBER, MACT, BENGALURU CITY, (SCCH-14), AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.5,17,300/- WITH INTEREST AT 7 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ITS REALIZATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, 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.No.7533/2018 dated 17.03.2022 by the XVI Addl. Judge, Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru, the appellant/Insurance Company is before this Court questioning the liability. 2. It is the case of the claimant that on 14.09.2018 at about 5.00 a.m., the claimant was proceeding in HGV/DCM as a cleaner along with driver and owner from Challakere towards Hyderabad on NH-44, when they reached near Mahaveera Dhaba Addakal Shivar, Mahaboobnagar District, Telangana - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:16092 MFA No. 4619 of 2022 State, at that time the driver of the said vehicle drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner in high speed, without caring for human safety and dashed against another goods vehicle. Due to the impact, the claimant had sustained grievous injuries. Immediately, he was shifted to the YSR Memorial hospital. It is the case of the appellant/Insurance Company that the claimant is not the employee of respondent No.1 and the vehicle has no permit to ply. On this, the Tribunal had given a finding that the claimant has produced Ex.P16, the attested copy of the temporary permit issued by the Motor Vehicles Inspector, Alampur C.P, Jogulamba, Gadwal District, Telangana State. As per Ex.P16, validity of the permit is from 11.09.2018 to 10.10.2018, the accident had taken place on 14.09.2018 and the Tribunal had held that the vehicle is having a valid permit to ply in Telangana State to Karnataka State. Further, in the medical records, the name of the claimant is shown as Hemareddy Son of Laxmireddy. In the Aadhar card also the name of the claimant is shown as Hemareddy S/o Lakshmireddy. In the wound certificate also similarly the name is shown, but only in the charge sheet it is shown as Vemareddy S/o Lakshmireddy. The Tribunal had taken that due - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:16092 MFA No. 4619 of 2022 to the mistake the name is wrongly entered. Even as per the police records, the claimant was a cleaner of the offending vehicle. The Tribunal came to the conclusion that the said contention of the Insurance Company that he is not an employee of respondent No.1 is without any basis and held that the insurance company is liable to pay the compensation. 3. Learned counsel appearing for appellant/Insurance Company had submitted in the similar lines and submits that the insurance company is not liable to pay the compensation. It is further submitted that the rate of interest is 10% per annum which is on the higher side and the same needs to be reduced. 4. Though notice is served on respondent No.3, no vakalath is filed on his behalf. 5. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, perused the material on record. This Court had perused the reasoning given by the Tribunal with regard to the liability. The Tribunal had rightly come to the conclusion that the claimant is working as a cleaner in the said vehicle and no contra evidence is produced by the insurance company. The Tribunal had rightly considered the police records and other - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:16092 MFA No. 4619 of 2022 documents and this Court finds no reasons to interfere with such a finding. As far as the interest part is concerned, the interest is reduced from the rate of 7% to 6% per annum. 6. Accordingly, the appeal of the appellant/Insurance Company is partly allowed. i. The interest is reduced from 7% p.a. to 6% p.a. ii. The amount in deposit shall be forthwith transmitted to the Tribunal. iii. The apportionment of the amount shall be as per the order passed by the Tribunal. iv. The appellant - insurance company shall deposit the remaining amount, if any, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment. On such deposit, the claimant is entitled to withdraw the entire amount without furnishing any security. v. No costs. vi. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE BN/List No.: 2 Sl No.: 35