- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11629 MFA No. 23165 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 23165 OF 2012 (MV-) BETWEEN: SEETARAM S/O. VENKAPPA HEGDE AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, OCC: CIVIL CONTRACTOR R/O C/O N.S.HEGDE, SAPTAPUR, DHARWAD-580 001. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. S. R. HEGDE, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. DEEPAK S/O. SHIVAJI DUGANE, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: OWNER OF THE VEHICLE R/O. RAMNAGAR, JOIDA TQ UTTARA KANNADA DIST. 2. IFFCO TOKIO GEN INS. CO. LTD., A/2 1ST FLOOR, ROTIANCE HOUSE ISIDORIO BAPTISTA ROAD, PAJIF & MARGOA - GOA-403 601 R/BY ITS MANAGER. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.Y. KATAGI, ADVOCATE FOR R2; R1-SERVED) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF M.V.C. ACT, 1988, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD IN M.V.C. 97/2007 ON THE FILE OF III ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADLD. MACT, DHARWAD DATED 23.01.2012 BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL AND THEREBY DECREED THE MVC NO.97/2007 AND AWARD THE COMPENSATION FOR RS. 18,00,000/- AS CLAIMED IN THE PETITION ALONG WITH COSTS, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Date: 2025.09.12 16:38:29 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11629 MFA No. 23165 of 2012 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI ORAL JUDGMENT This Appeal is filed by the petitioner, aggrieved by the dismissal of his claim petition in M.V.C. No.97/2007, vide judgment and award dated 23.01.2012 passed by the learned III Additional Senior Civil Judge and Additional MACT, Dharwad (for short, ‘the Tribunal’). 2. Brief facts, leading rise to the filing of this appeal are as follows: 3. On 06.04.2006, at about 3 pm, the petitioner was proceeding from Sirsi to Ganesha Gudi, on Yellapur road, on his Hero Honda motor cycle bearing registration No.KA-30/K-8236; At that time, the driver of Tata Mobile bearing registration No.KA-22/A-6487, came from the opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner and dashed to the motorcycle of the petitioner. As a result, the petitioner sustained the grievous injuries. Hence, the petitioner filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11629 MFA No. 23165 of 2012 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Accordingly, prays to allow the claim petition. 4. Despite the service of a notice, the owner of the offending vehicle remained absent before the tribunal, and was placed exparte. 5. The Insurance company filed a statement of objections denying the averments made in the claim petition and contended that the petitioner has not sustained any injuries in the alleged road traffic accident. The Petitioner sustained the injuries as he fell down, on account of the giddiness. As a result, he sustained injuries. It is contended that there is a delay in lodging the complaint and the driver of the offending vehicle did not possess a valid and effective driving license as of the date of the accident. Hence, the insurance company is not liable to pay compensation as claimed by the petitioner. Accordingly, prays to dismiss the claim petition against the insurance company. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11629 MFA No. 23165 of 2012 6. The Tribunal, based on the pleadings of the parties, framed the relevant issues. 7. The petitioner, to substantiate his case, examined himself as PW-1, examined the doctor as PW-2 and marked 33 documents as Exs.P-1 to P-33. The insurance company has not led any oral evidence ; However, one document was examined as Ex.R-1. 8. The Tribunal, after assessing the verbal and documentary evidence ,dismissed the claim petition vide judgment dated 23.01.2012. 9. The petitioner, aggrieved by the dismissal of the claim petition, filed this Miscellaneous First Appeal. 10. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner, and the learned counsel for the insurance company. 11. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has produced a copy of First Information - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11629 MFA No. 23165 of 2012 Report marked as Ex.P-1 and the order sheet in C.C.No.278/2007, which discloses that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle, and as the result the petitioner has sustained injuries in the road traffic accident. Therefore, the Tribunal committed an error in dismissing the claim petition without considering the documents produced by the petitioner. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow the appeal. 12. Per contra, the learned counsel for the insurance company submits that the alleged accident occurred on 06.04.2006 and as per the wound certificate, the petitioner was diagnosed by the doctor at Vivekananda General Hospital, Hubballi on 07.04.2006 at about 01.30 p.m. He also submits that the petitioner has not lodged the complaint for more than three months and the petitioner has not offered any explanation for lodging the complaint after three months. He also submits that the petitioner filed a private complaint and the JMFC court has referred the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11629 MFA No. 23165 of 2012 matter to the Police under Section 156(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure. He submits that it is not the case of the petitioner that he was totally bedridden and he could not lodge the complaint for more than three months. He submits that the petitioner colluding with the Police officials got filed a charge sheet. He also submits that the petitioner has manipulated the records and filed a false claim petition. Hence, it is submitted that the Tribunal was justified in dismissing the claim petition. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss the appeal. 13. Perused the records, and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. 14. The point that would arise for consideration is: whether the petitioner is entitled to the compensation? 15. The petitioner has contended that he met with an accident on 06.04.2006 and sustained the grievous injuries. The said fact has been seriously disputed by the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11629 MFA No. 23165 of 2012 insurance company. The alleged accident occurred on 06.04.2006 and from the perusal of the wound certificate issued by Vivekananda General Hospital, Hubballi, on 08.06.2006, discloses that the petitioner was admitted in the said hospital on 07.04.2006 at about 01.30 p.m. If really the petitioner would have met with an accident on 06.04.2006, the petitioner could have been hospitalized on 06.04.2006 itself. 16. To prove that the petitioner was admitted in the hospital on the date of alleged accident, the petitioner has not produced any records to show that he was admitted on 06.04.2006 for the alleged injuries sustained in the road traffic accident. 17. Further, the alleged accident occurred on 06.04.2006, and the complaint was filed on 29.07.2006. The petitioner, instead of lodging a complaint before the Police, had filed a private complaint on 29.07.2006. There is a delay of more than two, and a half month in lodging the - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11629 MFA No. 23165 of 2012 complaint. Further, the petitioner has produced the disability certificate marked as Ex. P-25, which discloses that the petitioner was admitted on 06.04.2006 and he was discharged on 18.04.2006. Thus, there is a delay of more than two and half months in filing the private complaint. There is an inconsistency in Ex. P-25 disability certificate and in the Wound certificate marked at EX. P-23. The Wound certificate at Ex.P-23 discloses that the petitioner was admitted in the said hospital on 07.04.2006 and the disability certificate at Ex.P25 discloses that he was admitted in the hospital on 06.04.2006. Thus, it creates a doubt in the mind of the Court that the petitioner, by colluding with the doctors of Vivekananda General Hospital, created the documents and filed this claim petition on the false, and baseless grounds. Hence, the Tribunal was justified in dismissing the claim petition on the ground that the petitioner has failed to prove that he has sustained a injuries in the alleged road traffic accident. Therefore, I do - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11629 MFA No. 23165 of 2012 not find any error in the impugned judgment. In view of the same, the point for consideration is answered accordingly. 18. In the result, I proceed to pass the following order: ORDER (i) The Miscellaneous First Appeal is dismissed. (ii) The impugned judgment and award M.V.C. No.97/2007, vide judgment and award dated 23.01.2012 passed by the learned III Additional Senior Civil Judge and Additional MACT, Dharwad is hereby confirmed. (iii) No order as to the costs. Sd/- (ASHOK S. KINAGI) JUDGE NAA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21