- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8366 MFA No. 23069 of 2012 C/W MFA.CROB No. 743 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 23069 OF 2012 (MV-I) C/W MFA CROSS OBJ NO. 743 OF 2013 IN MFA NO. 23069 OF 2012: BETWEEN: THE BRANCH MANAGER, SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., NO.259/31, IIND FLOOR, 10TH CROSS, WILSON GARDEN, BENGALURU-560 027 NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS LEGAL MANAGER. … APPELLANT (BY SRI. SURESH S. GUNDI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MEHBOOBSAB S/O. RAJASAB HAKKI, AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS AND OWNER OF THE LORRY BEARING REG. NO.KA 28/A 2982, R/O: H.NO.4-2-191, GANDHINAGAR, GANGAVATHI, DIST: KOPPAL. 2. HANMAPPA S/O. FAKIRAPPA KOORIGANOOR, AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER OF THE LORRY BEARING REG. NO.KA 28/A 2982, R/O: BANNIGIDADA CAMP, GANGAVATHI, DIST: KOPPAL. … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B. SHARANABASAWA, ADVOCATE FOR R1; R2-SERVED) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT 1988, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 09.02.2012 PASSED IN M.V.C. NO.320/2010 ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, AT GANGAVATHI. Digitally signed by MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8366 MFA No. 23069 of 2012 C/W MFA.CROB No. 743 of 2013 IN MFA CROSS OBJ. NO. 743 OF 2013: BETWEEN: SRI. MEHABOOBSAB S/O RAJASAB HAKKI, AGED ABUT 42 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS AND OWNER OF LORRY BEARING NO. KA-28/A-2982, R/O: H.NO.4-2-191, GANDHINAGAR, GANGAVATHI, TQ: GANGAVATHI, DIST: KOPPAL. … CROSS OBJECTOR (BY SRI. B. SHARANABASAWA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE BRANCH MANAGER, SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., NO. 259/31, II FLOOR, 10TH CROSS, WILSON GARDEN, BENGALURU-560 027. 2. HANMAPPA S/O. FAKEERAPPA KOORIGANOOR, AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER OF LORRY BEARING REG. NO.KA-28/A-2982, R/O: BANNIGIDADA CAMP, GANGAVATHI, DIST: KOPPAL. … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SURESH S. GUNDI, ADVOCATE FOR R1; R2-DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA CROB. IN MFA NO.23069/2012 IS FILED UNDER ORDER 41 RULE 22 OF CPC R/W SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT, 1988, PRAYING TO ENHANCING THE COMPENSATION AND MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 09.02.2012, PASSED IN M.V.C. NO.320/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, AT: GANGAVATHI. THIS APPEAL AND CROSS OBJECTION ARE COMING ON FOR FURTHER ARGUMENTS THIS DAY, JUDGMENT IS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8366 MFA No. 23069 of 2012 C/W MFA.CROB No. 743 of 2013 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) MFA No.23069/2012 is filed by the Insurance Company challenging the liability fastened on it, on the ground that the owner of lorry bearing registration No.KA-28/A-2982 has filed claim petition against himself by making the Insurance Company as party. Whereas, MFA No.743/2013 is filed by the claimant, seeking enhancement of compensation. 2. Both the appeals are filed against the judgment and award dated 09.02.2012 passed in MVC No.320/2010 on the file of Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Gangavathi (for short, ‘Tribunal’). 3. Brief facts of the case are that on 19.06.2010 at about 5.00 a.m., the claimant was travelling in a lorry bearing registration No.KA-28/A-2982 from Gangavathi main road, in between Chikkabenakal-Hrebenkal road. At that time, driver of lorry bearing registration No.KA-28/A-2982, who was arraigned as respondent No.1 before the Tribunal, driven the same in a rash and negligent manner. As a result of which, the said lorry went in a ditch by the right side of the road, on account of - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8366 MFA No. 23069 of 2012 C/W MFA.CROB No. 743 of 2013 which, the claimant sustained grievous injuries. Therefore, the claimant, being the owner of lorry bearing registration No.KA- 28/A-2982, has filed the claim petition under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, ‘Act’), seeking compensation. 4. The Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.1,67,000/- along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization by fastening liability on the Insurance Company, on the reason that there was existence of insurance policy. Therefore, held that the Insurance Company is liable to pay compensation to the claimant. 5. In the present case, the claimant, being owner of lorry, has filed the claim petition against the driver and Insurance Company. It is amounting to filing claim petition against himself. It is held by the Tribunal that the driver and Insurance Company are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation. Unless the owner is made a party, the Insurance Company alone could not be party in the claim petition. Here in the present case, the claimant himself is the owner of lorry, - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8366 MFA No. 23069 of 2012 C/W MFA.CROB No. 743 of 2013 therefore, the claim petition is not maintainable under Section 166 of the Act, as it is amounting to filing claim petition against himself. Fundamentally, the claim petition would be against the owner of lorry and just by virtue of contract of insurance, the Insurance Company will come into picture in the claim petition. Therefore, in the present case, the claimant, being owner of lorry, and the claim petition filed against the Insurance Company is not maintainable. Hence, the claim petition filed by the claimant-cum-owner is liable to be dismissed. Thus, the appeal filed by the Insurance Company is allowed and the appeal filed by the claimant-cum-owner for enhancement is dismissed. 6. Hence, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i) MFA No.23069/2012 filed by the Insurance Company is allowed. ii) MFA No.743/2013 filed by the claimant is dismissed. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8366 MFA No. 23069 of 2012 C/W MFA.CROB No. 743 of 2013 iii) The judgment and award dated 09.02.2012 passed in MVC No.320/2010 on the file of Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Gangavathi, is set aside. iv) The amount in deposit made by the Insurance Company shall be transmitted to Tribunal. v) No order as to costs. Sd/- (HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) JUDGE PMP CT:BCK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 56 - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8366 MFA No. 23069 of 2012 C/W MFA.CROB No. 743 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD [THE BRANCH MANAGER, VS. MEHBOOBSAB S/O. RAJASAB HAKKI, AND ANOTHER] 22.07.2025 (VIDEO CONFERENCING / PHYSICAL HEARING) CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR ORDER ON ‘MEMO FOR BEING SPOKEN TO’ This Court, vide order dated 03.07.2025, has disposed off the appeal by allowing the appeal filed by the Insurance Company. It is ordered in Clause-iv at page No.6 of the operative portion that amount in deposit made by the Insurance Company shall be transmitted to the Tribunal. It is submitted that the Insurance Company has deposited the amount before this Court. Therefore, instead of transmitting the amount to the Tribunal, the registry shall refund the deposited amount to the Insurance Company. Therefore, Clause-iv at page No.6 of the operative partition is modified to the extent above stated, which shall be read as under: “iv) The amount in deposit made by the Insurance Company before this Court shall be refunded.” - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8366 MFA No. 23069 of 2012 C/W MFA.CROB No. 743 of 2013 Registry to furnish fresh copy of judgment to the appellant. This order shall be read as part and parcel of the order dated 03.07.2025. Sd/- (HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) JUDGE PMP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1