- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12895 MFA No. 102807 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 102807 OF 2014 (MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. UNITED INIDA INSURANCE CO., LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE, KARWAR REP. BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER …APPELLANT (BY SRI. PREETI SHASHANK, ADV) AND: 1. SMT. SHOBHA W/O LATE MOHAN NAIK AGED 41 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, 2. VINOD S/O LATE MOHAN NAIK AGED 20 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, 3. GANESH S/O LATE MOHAN NAIK AGED 18 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, 4. OMKAR S/O LATE MOHAN NAIK AGED 15 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT RESPONDENT NO.4 IS MINOR REP BY HIS NATURAL GUARDIAN MOTHER, RESPONDENT NO.1 ALL ARE R/O. ADUKOLA, HONNAVAR, DIST: UTTAR KANNADA. 5. RAJDEEP S/O SHIVANAND NAIK RIDER CUM OWNER OF MOTOR CYCLE BEARING NO. GA-03/Q-6758 R/O. H.NO.50, RATTA WADO, NERUL, BARDEZ, BOA, NORTH GOA - 403114 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ANKIT R. DESAI, ADV FOR R1 TO R4, R4 IS MINOR, REP/BY R1, NOTICE TO R5 IS SERVED) MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12895 MFA No. 102807 of 2014 THIS MFA IS FILED U/SEC.173(1) OF MV ACT 1988, AGAINST JUDGMENT AND AWARD DTD:19.07.2014, PASSED IN MVC.NO.106/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL M.A.C.T. AT HONAVAR, AWARDING THE COMPENSTION OF RS.8,03,000/- WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 6% P.A., FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALISATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the Insurance Company challenging the judgment and award dated 19.07.2014 passed in MVC No.106/2013 by the learned Addl. MACT, Honnavar (‘Tribunal’ for short). 2. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this appeal are as follows: 2.1. One Mohan Durgappa Naik – the deceased, who was aged about 50 years, died on 07.06.2013 due to the injuries suffered by him in a road traffic accident caused on 04.06.2013 while walking on the side of the road near Sai Temple, Malim Jetty, Bardes, Goa caused by a motorcycle - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12895 MFA No. 102807 of 2014 bearing Reg.No.GA-03/Q-6758. One Rama Naik lodged a complaint before the Police intimating the accident. The petitioners, being the legal representatives of the deceased, filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. 3. Notice was issued to the rider-cum-owner of the motorcycle. Despite service of notice, he remained unrepresented and was placed ex-parte. 4. The Insurance Company filed a statement of objections denying the averments made in the claim petition and contended that the accident occurred due to the contributory negligence on the part of the rider of the motorcycle in question and by the deceased. It was also contended that, the rider of the motorcycle in question did not possess a valid and effective driving license as of the date of accident. There is a breach of policy conditions. Hence, prays to dismiss the claim petition against the Insurance Company. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12895 MFA No. 102807 of 2014 5. The Tribunal, based on the pleadings of the parties, framed the relevant issues. 6. The petitioners, to substantiate their case, petitioner No.1 was examined as PW-1, one more witness was examined as PW-2 and marked 4 documents as Exs.P1 to P4. In rebuttal, the Insurance Company has not led any oral evidence, but marked a document as Ex.R1 with consent. 7. The Tribunal, after assessing the verbal and documentary evidence, allowed the claim petition in part with cost and awarded a compensation of Rs.8,03,000/- with 6% interest p.a. and held that the owner and the insurer of the offending vehicle are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation amount and the Insurance Company was directed to deposit the compensation amount. 8. The Insurance Company, aggrieved by the impugned judgment and award, filed this appeal. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12895 MFA No. 102807 of 2014 9. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the Insurance Company and the learned counsel for the petitioners. 10. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company submits that, the deceased, being a pedestrian, has contributed to the cause of accident. There was negligence on the part of the deceased. The Tribunal committed an error in fastening the entire liability on the Insurance Company. Hence, on this ground, she prays to allow the appeal. 11. Per contra, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the charge sheet has been filed against the rider of the motorcycle in question. To prove that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent riding of the rider of the motorcycle, the petitioners have examined an eye-witness as PW-2, who had deposed that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent riding of the rider of - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12895 MFA No. 102807 of 2014 the motorcycle. Hence, on this ground, he prays to dismiss the appeal. 12. Perused the records and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. The point that arises for consideration is regarding the liability. 13. Admittedly, PW-2 is the eye-witness. The Tribunal, considering the evidence of PW-2, has rightly recorded its finding that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent riding of the rider of the motorcycle and rightly fastened the liability jointly and severally on the owner and the Insurance Company and directed the Insurance Company to deposit the compensation amount. I do not find any error in the impugned judgment and award. 14. In view of the above discussion, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i. The appeal is dismissed; - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12895 MFA No. 102807 of 2014 ii. The judgement and the award passed by the Tribunal, is hereby confirmed. iii. Amount in deposit, if any, and the Trial Court records shall be transmitted to the Tribunal; iv. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. Sd/- (ASHOK S. KINAGI) JUDGE PA CT: BSB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19