- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:15656 MFA No. 6626 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 6626 OF 2014 (MV-I) BETWEEN: THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., CHIGATERI MERCANTILE BUILDING, CHAMARAJPET, DAVANAGERE-577 001. NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, SUBHARAM COMPLEX, 144, M.G.ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. A.N.KRISHNA SWAMY., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. NAGARAJU, S/O BASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE & HOTEL WORK, R/O CHIKKAJAJUR VILLAGE, HOLALKERE TALUK, NOW R/O JOGIMATTI ROAD, 7TH CROSS, CHITRADURGA-577 501 2. SHIVAKUMAR, S/O THIMMAPPA, Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:15656 MFA No. 6626 of 2014 MAJOR, OWNER OF MOTORCYCLE BEARING NO.KA-16/R-1285, R/O SINGENAHALLI VILLAGE, RAMAGIRI HOBLI, HOLALKERE TALUK-577 526. …RESPONDENTS (RESPONDENTS ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 25.06.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.510/2008 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, ADDITIONAL MACT, HOLALKERE, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.78,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL DEPOSIT. 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 orders passed in MVC No.510/2008 dated 25.06.2014 by the Court of Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Holalkere, the Insurance Company is before this Court. The claim petition was filed seeking compensation of an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by the claimants who are the rider and the pillion-rider. 2. It is their case that, the claimant in MVC No.509/2008 was riding the motor cycle and that the claimant in - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:15656 MFA No. 6626 of 2014 MVC No.510/2008 was a pillion-rider. At that time they were going on the motor cycle bearing Reg.No.KA-16/Q-8987 from Harihar to his native place, because of the rash and negligent driving of the rider of the motor cycle bearing Reg.No. KA-16/R-1285, both of them have sustained injuries. The Insurance Company had denied the involvement of the said vehicle and in support of their case, they have placed before the Tribunal Ex.R3 i.e., the report submitted by the Superintendent of Police to the Director General of Police and as per the same, the said vehicle is implicated in this case and there is no involvement and in fact, the action is initiated against the Police Officer who has conducted the investigation. The Tribunal had held that, the author of Ex.R3 Superintendent of Police has not supported the case of the Insurance Company and the said evidence was not considered by the Tribunal. Then coming to the remaining evidence, the driver of the opposite vehicle had pleaded guilty and the Court had imposed fine and accordingly held that, the Insurance Company is liable to pay the compensation and granted compensation of an amount of Rs.78,000/- respectively. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:15656 MFA No. 6626 of 2014 3. Learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company submits that the claimants have played fraud on the Court and it is supported by Ex.R3. The Tribunal had failed to consider the said document and the persons who have come to the Court unclean hands are not entitled for any relief from the Court. It is submitted that, the Tribunal, without considering all these aspects, had granted the compensation. 4. Though notice is served on the respondents, no vakalat is filed on their behalf. 5. Having heard the learned counsel for the Insurance Company, perused the entire material on record, Insurance Company relied upon Ex.R3 and also the evidence of RW-2. It is the evidence of RW-2 that, investigation is not concluded and it is yet to be completed, further he has not supported the case of the Insurance Company. In the considered opinion of this Court, the Tribunal has rightly not considered the said evidence and basing on the other evidences available on record, had rightly held that the accident has happened because of the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the opposite vehicle and - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:15656 MFA No. 6626 of 2014 rightly granted the compensation. Hence, this Court finds no reason to interfere. i. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the Insurance Company is dismissed; ii. 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. iii. The amount in deposit shall be forthwith transferred to the Tribunal. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE PA List No.: 2 Sl No.: 51