- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7392 MFA No. 102359 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 06TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.102359 OF 2014 (MV) BETWEEN: 1A. 1B. 1C. Y.R.MANOHAR, AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. AMRUTHA 421/22, 2 MAIN, 7TH CROSS AMARJYOTI NAGAR, BENGALURU, SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LEGAL HEIRS, SMT. LALITHA W/O MANOHAR Y.R., AGE: 61 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: NO.22, 7TH CROSS, 2ND MAIN ROAD, VIJAYA NAGAR, BENGALURU-560 040. PRATHIMA D/O MANOHAR Y.R., AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: NO.22, 7TH CROSS, 2ND MAIN ROAD, VIJAYA NAGAR, BENGALURU-560 040. PRAVIN S/O MANOHAR Y.R., AGE: 34 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: NO.22, 7TH CROSS, 2ND MAIN ROAD, VIJAYA NAGAR, BENGALURU-560 040. … APPELLANTS (BY SRI M.M.NAIKWADI, ADVOCATE.) AND: 1. RAMESH S/O HANUMANTHAPPA SHELKE, SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR’S., SMT. SUDHA W/O. RAMESH SHELKE, AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE WIFE, R/O: SHELKE COMPLEX, DHARWAD-580 001. Digitally signed by MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7392 MFA No. 102359 of 2014 2. SRINIVAS S/O. RAMESH SHELKE, AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: SHELKE COMPLEX, DHARWAD-580 001. 3. APARNA D/O. RAMESH SHELKE, AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: DOCTOR, R/O: SHELKE COMPLEX, DHARWAD-580 001. 4. THE BRANCH MANAGER, THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., J.C. ROAD, BRANCH-670 201, LAXMI BUILDING, 2ND FLOOR, BENGALURU-560 002. 5. THE BRANCH MANAGER, UNITED INSURANCE CO. LTD., BRANCH OFFICER, TONTADARYA VIDYAPEETHA, PALA, BADAMI ROAD, ROTARY CIRCLE, GADAG-582 201. … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI SURESH P. HUDEDAGADDI, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R3; SRI RAJASHEKHAR S. ARANI, ADVOCATE FOR R4; SRI S.S. KOLIWAD, ADVOCATE FOR R5.) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 20.06.2014, PASSED IN MVC NO.488/2010, ON THE FILE OF THE FAST TRACK COURT AND ADDITIONAL M.A.C.T., DHARWAD AND ETC.,. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, JUDGMENT IS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7392 MFA No. 102359 of 2014 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) The respondent No.1 has preferred this appeal challenging the judgment and award dated 20.06.2014, passed by the Fast Track Court and Additional MACT, Dharwad, in MVC No.488/2010. 2. Heard the arguments of respective learned counsels appearing for both the sides and perused the material placed before the Court. 3. In this case accident is between ambulance vehicle bearing No.KA-26/M-1028 and Toyota Qualis vehicle No.KA-02/MD-6600. The ambulance vehicle is fitted with medical and ICU equipments for carrying patients to be admitted to KMC Hospital at Manipal. In the accident due to rash and negligent driving of the car by its driver, ambulance vehicle was severely damaged. Therefore upon the claim petition filed by the owner of the ambulance vehicle, the tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.2,75,000/- with - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7392 MFA No. 102359 of 2014 interest at the rate of 8% p.a. The owner of the car had challenged the said award as it is exorbitant one. 4. Admittedly from the evidence on record it is proved that the damaged vehicle is an ambulance vehicle having facility of ICU also and in the said accident the vehicle was extremely damaged along with medical equipments inside the ambulance vehicle. The documentary evidence such as Photographs (Ex.P11), Estimation Letter (Ex.P12), Estimation Summary (Ex.P13) and Valuation Report (Ex.P19) proved the fact that ambulance vehicle was damaged along with medical equipments. PW.2 is surveyor has conducted survey before repair of ambulance vehicle. Ex.P13 is estimation summary given by Sutaria Auto Centre, Hubli, which discloses that ambulance vehicle requires repair cost of Rs.4,46,429/-. Ex.P17 is valuation report submitted by PW3, who is Chartered Engineer and Registered Valuer, Surveyor and Loss Assessor, which states that the total damage cost of ambulance vehicle including ICU and other medical equipments, worth of not less than Rs.6,02,500/-. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7392 MFA No. 102359 of 2014 The claimants have given evidence of both surveyors, who have surveyed before and after repair of ambulance vehicle. 5. On these evidences, the Tribunal, has awarded a compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- in respect of their vehicle damage including damage caused to medical and ICU equipments fitted in the said vehicle. Further, the Tribunal has awarded a compensation of Rs.5,000/- towards towing charges and Rs.70,000/- towards loss of income due to accident to their ambulance vehicle holding that due to accident to their ambulance vehicle they did not use the said vehicle for a period of one year. Thus, in total, has awarded a compensation of Rs.2,75,000/- along with interest at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit. 6. Upon re-appreciation of evidence on record as above discussed, the vehicle is not a mere vehicle, but is an ambulance vehicle with inclusion of medical and ICU equipments. Not only ambulance vehicle damaged, but also medical and ICU equipments were damaged. Considering the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7392 MFA No. 102359 of 2014 evidence of PW.2 and PW.3 and documentary evidence placed on record, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is found to be just and proper, which requires no interference of this Court. Thus, the appeal is liable to be dismissed as being devoid of merit. 7. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i) The appeal is dismissed. ii) In view of dismissal of appeal, pending I.A’s, if any, shall also stands disposed off. iii) No order as to cost. Sd/- (HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) JUDGE MRK-para 1 to 4. PMP-para 5 to end. CT:BCK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 38