Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 51137 (KAR)

THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED v. HARISH RAI

MFA/4796/2016 · 2025-09-16

P Sree Sudha

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37856 MFA No. 4796 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 4796 OF 2016 (MV-I) BETWEEN: THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED KRISHNA PRASAD BUILDING MAIN ROAD, PUTTUR, D.K. DISTRICT, NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS DEPUTY MANAGER GOPAL REDDY, REGIONAL OFFICE, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, 5TH FLOOR, KRUSHI BHAVAN, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, HUDSON CIRCLE, BENGALURU-560 001. &APPELLANT (BY SRI. L.SREEKANTA RAO., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. HARISH RAI, S/O. LATE KITTANA RAI, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/AT BANNOOR HOUSE, BANOOR VILLAGE, PUTTUR TALUK, D.K. DISTRICT-574241. 2. RAFIQUE S/O. K.MOHAMMED, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/O. PONOTTU MEGINAPETE, Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37856 MFA No. 4796 of 2016 VITTAL KASABA VILLAGE, BANTWAL TALUK, DAKSHINA KANNADA-574153. (DRIVER OF JEEP NO.MYG 738) 3. SYED ABDUL SUBHAN S/O. M.RAHMAN SHARIFF, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, R/O. NO. 142/5, E. NO. 3RD STREET, SHIVAJI ROAD CROSS, SHIVAJI NAGAR, BENGALURU-560051. (OWNER OF JEEP NO. MYG 738) &RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.LETHIF, ADVOCATE FOR R2; VIDE ORDER DATED 21.02.2023, NOTICE TO R1 HELD SUFFICIENT; VIDE ORDER DATED 30.10.2023 SERVICE OF NOTICE IN R/O. R3 H/S BY WAY OF PAPER PUBLICATION) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 21.12.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.1215/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, & ACJM, MEMBER, MACT, PUTTUR, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF Rs.1,90,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37856 MFA No. 4796 of 2016 ORAL JUDGMENT Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant. 2. Learned counsel for the respondents is absent. 3. This appeal is filed by the Insurance Company challenging the judgment and award dated 21.12.2015 passed in MVC No.1215/2011 by the Prl. Senior Civil Judge & A.C.J.M & Member, MACT, Puttur (hereinafter referred as 'Tribunal' for short), fastening the liability on them. 4. This is a case of injury where the claimant filed an application before the Tribunal seeking compensation of Rs.6,50,000/- along with interest at the rate of 12% p.a. The Tribunal considering the entire evidence on record granted compensation of Rs.1,90,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization. Aggrieved by the said award, the Insurance Company has preferred the present appeal. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37856 MFA No. 4796 of 2016 5. Learned counsel for the appellant mainly contends that the accident was occurred on 14.10.2009, whereas the insurance policy was in force only/issued from 11.11.2009 to 10.11.2010. As such, the policy was not in existence on the date of accident. 6. It is submitted that the appellant had filed an application before the Tribunal seeking amendment of the written statement to include the aforesaid plea, but the said application was dismissed. Subsequently, the Tribunal observing that, as per the admission in the written statement of respondent No.3, that the jeep was insured, held that once the fact of insurance was admitted, there was no requirement for further proof. As such, the Tribunal concluded that the Insurance Company could not escape liability to indemnify respondent No.3/owner of the vehicle and accordingly, the Tribunal directed them to deposit the awarded compensation amount. 7. Admittedly, the insurance policy was not in existence as on the date of accident. As such, the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37856 MFA No. 4796 of 2016 Insurance Company is not liable to pay the compensation. However, since this objection was not raised in the written statement and is now being raised at a later stage, this Court finds it reasonable to direct the appellant-Insurance Company to deposit the compensation amount along with interest at the rate of 8% within one month from the date of order. Further the Insurance Company is at liability to recover the same from the owner of the vehicle by due process of law. 8. The appeal is allowed in part. 9. The amount already deposited shall be transferred to the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. 10. On such deposit, the respondents are permitted to withdraw the same. Sd/- (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE TMP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 50