- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28843 MFA No. 1077 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1077 OF 2020 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SRI. MUNIRAJU @ MUNIRAJAPPA, S/O BASAVALINGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, R/A NO.135, KOLATHUR VILLAGE AND POST, HOSAKOTE TQ, BANGALORE RURAL DIST. …APPELLANT (BY SMT. P.V. KALPANA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE BRANCH MANAGER BHARATHI AXA GEN. INS. CO. LTD., IST FLOOR, FERNA ICON, SY NO.28, DODDANAKUNDI, BANGALORE. 2. NARASIMHAMURHTY K.M, S/O MUNIRAJAPPA K.B, MAJOR, R/A NO.35, KOLATHUR VILLAGE AND POST, HOSAKOTE TQ, BANGALORE RURAL DIST. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ASHOK.H, ADVOCATE FOR SRI.PRADEEP B, ADVOCATE FOR R1; VIDE ORDER DATED 26.09.2022, NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH) Digitally signed by ANJALI M Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28843 MFA No. 1077 of 2020 THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED. 11.09.2019, PASSED IN MVC NO.6995/2016, ON THE FILE OF THE X-ADDITIONAL JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU (SCCH-16), DISMISSING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR ORAL JUDGMENT The appellant being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 11.09.2019 passed in MVC No.6995/2016 by the X Additional Judge, Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru, has preferred this appeal by invoking the provisions of Section 163(A) of the Motor Vehicles Act. 2. The parties to this appeal are referred to as per their rank before the Trial Court for convenience. 3. The brief facts leading to this appeal are as under: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28843 MFA No. 1077 of 2020 That on 22.09.2016 at about 6.15 p.m., the petitioner was travelling as a pillion rider on a motor bike bearing registration No.KA-53-EM-6094. The rider of the motor bike was riding the bike carefully and cautiously. It is stated that, near Goutham Colony Circle at Hoskote, the driver of the Tata Sumo bearing Reg.No.KA-05-N-6348 by driving his vehicle in a rash and negligent manner in high speed, dashed to the motorcycle. Because of this impact, petitioner fell down and sustained severe injuries and he was immediately shifted to the MVJ Hospital and after first aid treatment, he was shifted to Hosmat Hospital and took the treatment as inpatient in the said hospital. 4. It is stated that, the petitioner prior to accident, was working as a barber and earning Rs.3,300/- p.m. Because of the injuries, he is permanently disabled and lost the earning capacity. To which, he has registered a complaint. The petition came to be filed under Section 163(A) of the Motor Vehicles Act, claiming compensation - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28843 MFA No. 1077 of 2020 against respondents i.e., owner of the two wheeler bearing Reg.No.KA-53-EM-6094, as well as the insurer. 5. The respondent No.1 appeared before the tribunal and filed objections by denying all the assertions. It is specifically contended that, the owner and the insurer of the Tata Sumo are the necessary parties. Therefore, the petition be dismissed for not making them as necessary parties. According, to respondent No.1, there is violation of terms and conditions of the policy. 6. The learned trial Court framed relevant issues. Before the tribunal, petitioner himself entered the witness box and also examined PW2 by name Dr.Krishnan Prasad and marked documents as Ex.P1 to Ex.P18. To rebut the evidence of the petitioner, Sri. Vinay Kumar.B respondent No.1 entered the witness box, none of the documents were marked against the respondents. 7. The learned tribunal on hearing the arguments and on evaluation of evidence dismissed the petition filed - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28843 MFA No. 1077 of 2020 by the petitioner on the ground that, the petitioner himself has admitted in the cross examination that, he was riding the motor bike and further the injuries are not proved in accordance with law. This is how, the petitioner is now before this Court challenging dismissal of his petition. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, though PW1 has stated in his examination chief that, his son is the rider of the motor bike, but in cross examination he has stated that, on the date of incident he was riding the motor bike and on that stray evidence, petition came to be dismissed by the tribunal. Learned counsel submits that through out the evidence, PW1 has stated that, he was a pillion rider, but not the rider of the motor bike. 9. Learned counsel fairly admits that, the insurer and the insured of the Tata Sumo vehicle are not made as parties to the petition. She further submits that, she may be permitted to implead them and proceed further. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28843 MFA No. 1077 of 2020 10. Learned counsel for respondent No.1 also submits that, petitioner has not made them as necessary parties and the main allegations is against the driver of the Tata Sumo bearing Reg.No.KA-05-N-6348, who drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner. Because of non-joinder of the necessary parties, the petition came to be dismissed. 11. Perused the impugned judgment, as well as the deposition of PW1. The main allegation is against driver of the Tata Sumo bearing Reg.No.KA-05-N-6348. Because of rash and negligent driving of Tata Sumo vehicle by its driver, the accident has taken place. As the owner and insurer of the said offending Tata Sumo vehicle are not impleaded as respondents in the petition and hence, it is just and proper to give an opportunity to the petitioner to implead the owner of the Tata Sumo and insurer of the vehicle and proceed further. Therefore, the impugned judgment and award is to be set aside and the matter requires remanded before the tribunal for disposal in - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28843 MFA No. 1077 of 2020 accordance with law after impleading the aforesaid owner of Tata Sumo and insurer, if any. Hence, the following: ORDER i. Appeal is allowed. ii. Judgment and award dated 11.07.2019 passed in MVC.No.6995/2016 by the X Additional Judge, Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru, is set aside. iii. The matter is remanded to the trial Court for fresh disposal. iv. The appellant is permitted to implead the owner and insurer if any, the Tata Sumo vehicle bearing Reg.No.KA-05-N-6348. v. All the rights of the parties are kept open. Sd/- (RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR) JUDGE PK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6 CT: BHK