THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, v. RAJAMA DADESAB UMACHAGI,
MFA/21835/2012 · 2025-07-17
Hanchate Sanjeevkumar
Civil Appealbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 37992 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 37992 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8908 MFA No. 21835 of 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 21835 OF 2012 (WC) BETWEEN:
THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, RAMDEV GALLI, BELAGAVI, THROUGH THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, SUJATA COMPLEX, OPPOSITE GLASS HOUSE, HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD.
… APPELLANT (BY SRI S.K. KAYAKAMATH, ADVOCATE.)
AND:
1.
SMT. RAJAMA DADESAB UMACHAGI,
2.
SMT. DAVALBI @ BUDDEMMA W/O SAIDUSAB UMACHAGI, (33 YEARS),
3.
KUMARI. SALMA D/O SAIDUSAB UMACHAGI, (13 YEARS),
4.
KUMARI. NAJAREEN SAIDUSAB UMACHAGI, (11 YEARS),
5.
KUMAR. FAYAZ SAIDUSAB UMACHAGI, (07 YEARS),
ALL ARE R/O: BADAMI, TALUK: BADAMI, DIST: BAGALKOT.
(RESPONDENTS NO.3, 4 AND 5 ARE REP. BY RESPONDENT NO.2 NATURAL MOTHER).
Digitally signed by MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH
- 2 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8908 MFA No. 21835 of 2012
6.
SMT. KAMALAKSHI W/O RAGHAV, D.NO.2/509, KOLAMBO, MANGALORE.
… RESPONDENTS (R1 AND R2 – NOTICE SERVED;
R3, R4 AND R5 ARE MINOR R/BY R2;
R6 – SERVICE OF NOTICE HELD SUFFICIENT.)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 30(1) OF THE WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION ACT, 1923, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 13.12.2011, PASSED IN W.C.A./F-373/2007, ON THE FILE OF THE COMMISSIONER FOR WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION, BAGALKOT AND ETC.,.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT IS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR)
Heard the arguments and perused the records and the appeal papers.
2. This appeal is filed by the insurance company challenging the judgment and order dated 13.12.2011, passed by the Labour Officer and Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation, Bagalkot, in WC.A:F/373/2007, questioning the liability fastened on it to pay compensation, on the ground that the vehicle involved in the accident is a truck which is a heavy goods vehicle and
- 3 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8908 MFA No. 21835 of 2012
the driver of the offending vehicle was having driving licence to drive LMV (non transport). Therefore, there is violation of policy conditions as the driver was not competent to drive heavy goods vehicle the truck.
3. Ex.R.8 is the driving licence. It proves the fact that the driver was holding driving licence to drive LMV (non transport) only from 10.06.1991 to 09.07.2010. Therefore, there is no driving licence to drive the heavy goods vehicle. Therefore, it is proved that there is violation of conditions of insurance policy. Hence the insurance company is not liable to pay compensation.
4. Even considering the question of order of pay and recovery could be made, but it is also not applicable, since the deceased was the driver who cannot be considered as a third party. The benefit of pay and recovery is applicable only to the third parties as per sub- section (1) of section 149 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Since in the present case the deceased is the driver of the
- 4 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8908 MFA No. 21835 of 2012
offending vehicle, therefore, an order of pay and recovery also could not be made. Therefore, the owner of the offending vehicle alone is liable to pay compensation. Hence the appeal is liable to be allowed.
5. In the result, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER i) The appeal is allowed. ii) The judgment and order dated 13.12.2011, passed by the Labour Officer and Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation, Bagalkot, in WC.A:F/373/2007, is modified holding that the owner of the truck alone shall pay compensation to the claimants. iii) The order of Commissioner fastening liability on the insurance company to pay compensation to the claimants is set aside. iv) The amount in deposit shall be refunded to the appellant insurance company.
- 5 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8908 MFA No. 21835 of 2012
v) No order as to costs. vi) Draw modified award accordingly.
Sd/- (HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) JUDGE
MRK CT:BCK LIST NO.: 3 SL NO.: 8