- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12847 MFA No. 101168 of 2015 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. 101168 OF 2015 (MV-I) BETWEEN: THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., C.B.O., VIKAS COMPLEX STATION ROAD, HUBLI. NOW REPTD., BY ITS DEPUTY MANAGER, THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD. REGIONAL OFFICE, IIND FLOOR, SUMANGALA COMPLEX, LAMINGTON ROAD, HUBLI-580 020. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. M. Y. KATAGI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MAHANTAYYA @ MAHANTESH S/O SANGAYYA HIREMATH, AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURAL and PRIEST, R/O: GOBBARGUMPI, TQ: NAVALGUND, DIST: DHARWAD. 2. DEVENDRAPPA S/O. NEELKANTAPPA SALI, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRICULTURAL, R/O: GOBBERAGUMPI, TQ: NAVALGUND, (OWNER OF THE BAJAJ MOTOR CYCLE BEARING NO.KA-25/EE-1622) …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHIVAKUMAR S BADAWADAGI, ADVOCATE) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, 1988, PRAYING TO CALL THE RECORDS, HEAR THE PARTIES, AND ALLOW THE APPEAL AS PRAYED FOR BY SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 18.11.2011 PASSED BY THE FIRST ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM AND ADDL. M.A.C.T, DHARWAD, SITTING AT NAVALGUND, IN MVC NO.324/2011, N THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12847 MFA No. 101168 of 2015 THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI ORAL JUDGMENT This Appeal is filed under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ‘M.V.Act,’ for short) by the Insurance Company, challenging the judgment and award dated 18.11.2014 passed in MVC No.324/2011 by the learned I Additional Senior Civil Judge & CJM and Additional MACT, Dharwad sitting at Navalgund. 2. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this appeal, are as follows: 3. On 22.11.2010, at about 10.45 p.m., the petitioner was riding his brand new TVS Sports motorcycle from Alagwadi to Gobbargumpi slowly by observing the traffic rules. At that time, a motorcycle bearing Reg.No.KA- 25/EE-1622 coming from the opposite direction, ridden by its rider in a rash and negligent manner, and dashed to the motorcycle of the petitioner. As a result, the petitioner - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12847 MFA No. 101168 of 2015 sustained grievous injuries. The petitioner filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the M.V.Act seeking compensation for the injuries sustained by him in a road traffic accident. Accordingly, prays to allow the claim petition. 4. The owner of the offending motorcycle filed a statement of objections denying the averments made in the claim petition. It is contended that the rider of the offending motorcycle possessed a valid and effective driving license as of the date of the accident, and the policy was valid. Hence, he prays to dismiss the claim petition against the owner of the offending motorcycle. 5. The Insurance Company filed a statement of objections denying the averments made in the claim petition. It is contended that the driver of the offending motorcycle did not possess a valid and effective driving license as of the date of the accident. Hence, there is - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12847 MFA No. 101168 of 2015 breach of the policy conditions. Hence, prays to dismiss the claim petition against the Insurance Company. 6. The Tribunal, based on the pleadings of the parties, framed the relevant issues. 7. The petitioner to substantiate his case, examined himself as P.W.1, examined the doctor as P.W.2, and marked 25 documents as Exs.P1 to P25. Conversely, on the other hand, an official of the Insurance Company was examined as R.W.1, and marked 3 documents as Exs.R1 to R3. 8. The Tribunal, after assessing the verbal and documentary evidence, allowed the claim petition in part with costs vide judgment dated 18.11.2014 and awarded a compensation of Rs.5,39,312/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of the petition till deposit. It is held that the respondents are liable to the pay the compensation to the petitioner and directed Insurance Company to pay the compensation amount to the petitioner. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12847 MFA No. 101168 of 2015 9. The Insurance Company, aggrieved by the judgment and award passed in MVC No.324/2011, has filed this Miscellaneous First Appeal. 10. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the Insurance Company, and the learned counsel for the petitioner. 11. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company submits that the alleged accident occurred on 22.11.2010, however, the complaint has been lodged on 06.12.2010, and there is delay of 14 days in filing the complaint. He submits that the wound certificate discloses that the petitioner was brought to the hospital on 23.11.2010 at 8.40 a.m., wherein the MLC i.e., as per Ex.P25, it discloses that he was admitted to the hospital on 23.11.2010, and not on 22.11.2010. Hence, it creates doubt regarding whether the petitioner has really sustained injuries in the road traffic accident. The said aspect was not properly considered by the Tribunal, and committed an error in - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12847 MFA No. 101168 of 2015 fastening the liability on the insurance Company. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow the appeal. 12. Per contra, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has produced the wound certificate, which discloses that the petitioner was brought to the Government Hospital, Navalgund on 22.11.2010, but due to the oversight, it is written as 23.11.2010. He submits that on the next day, he got admitted to the SDM Hospital, Dharwad. He submits that the MLC certificate discloses that the petitioner has met with an accident on 22.11.2010 and not on 23.11.2010. He also submits that he has produced the medical records, which discloses that he met with an accident on 22.11.2010. He further that he was submits taking treatment during the said period, and he could not lodge the complaint within time. To buttress his arguments, he placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of RAVI VS BADRINARAYAN AND OTHERS reported in (2011) 4 SCC 693. He submits that the Tribunal was justified in fastening the liability - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12847 MFA No. 101168 of 2015 jointly and severally on the owner and Insurance Company. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to dismiss the appeal. 13. Perused the records, and considered the submission of the learned counsel for the parties. 14. The point, that would arise for my consideration is regarding the liability. Regarding Liability: 15. There is no dispute regarding the occurrence of the accident, and the injuries sustained by the petitioner in a road traffic accident. The petitioner has produced the wound certificate marked as Ex.P6, the petitioner was taken to the Government Hospital at Navalgund immediately after accident and taken first aid treatment on 22.11.2010, but the doctor instead of writing as 22.11.2010, it has been wrongly written as 23.11.2010. From the perusal of the said wound certificate, it discloses that the petitioner has sustained grievous injuries in a road traffic accident. The - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12847 MFA No. 101168 of 2015 petitioner has also produced the discharge summary marked as Ex.P15, which discloses that the petitioner was admitted to the SDM Hospital, Dharwad with the history of road traffic accident on 22.11.2010 at 7.30 to 8.30 near Navalgund Savadatti Road and sustained injuries to the head, and it was noticed by the pedestrians. He lost consciousness till morning. Later, he was taken to the Government Hospital, Navalgund, and thereafter brought to the SDM Hospital, Dharwad. He was admitted in the SDM Hospital, Dharwad on 23.11.2010 and discharged on 27.12.2010, and the complaint was lodged by the complainant on 06.12.2010. The petitioner was admitted in the hospital and could not give complaint within time. The complainant has lodged the complaint, and a criminal case was registered against the rider of the offending motorcycle. The police after investigation filed a charge sheet. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of BADRINARAYAN AND OTHERS (SUPRA), at paragraph 17 held as follows: - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12847 MFA No. 101168 of 2015 “17. It is well-settled that delay in lodging FIR cannot be a ground to doubt the claimant's case. Knowing the Indian conditions as they are, we cannot expect a common man to first rush to the Police Station immediately after an accident. Human nature and family responsibilities occupy the mind of kith and kin to such an extent that they give more importance to get the victim treated rather than to rush to the Police Station. Under such circumstances, they are not expected to act mechanically with promptitude in lodging the FIR with the Police. Delay in lodging the FIR thus, cannot be the ground to deny justice to the victim.” 16. Thus, the judgment relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner is squarely applicable to the facts of the present case. The Tribunal was justified in holding that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent riding of the rider of the offending motorcycle. 17. From the perusal of the medical records, it clearly discloses that the petitioner immediately after the accident taken to the Government Hospital at Navalgund on the date of the accident, and later on he was shifted to the - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12847 MFA No. 101168 of 2015 SDM Hospital, Dharwad on the next date, i.e., on 23.11.2010. The Insurance Company has not seriously challenged the medical records produced by the petitioner. The Insurance Company is trying to take advantage of Ex.P6, i.e., wherein the doctor has written the date of admission of petitioner to the Government Hospital at Navalgund as 23.11.2010 instead of 22.11.2010. The Tribunal considering the entire evidence on record was justified in fastening the liability on the Insurance Company. I do not find any error in the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal. 18. In view of the above discussion, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i) The Appeal is dismissed. ii) The judgment and award dated 18.11.2014 passed in MVC No.324/2011 by the learned I Additional Senior Civil Judge & CJM and - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12847 MFA No. 101168 of 2015 Additional MACT, Dharwad sitting at Navalgund, is hereby confirmed. iii) The Tribunal records, and the amount in deposit, if any, shall be transmitted to the Tribunal concerned, forthwith. Sd/- (ASHOK S. KINAGI) JUDGE MBS CT:ANB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26