- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10061 MFA No. 25715 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 25715 OF 2012 (MV-I) BETWEEN: 1. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, I FLOOR, MELLIGERI COMPLEX, KALADAGI ROAD, BAGALKOT, HEREIN REP. BY NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, CELL, SUJATA COMPLEX, P.B. ROAD, HUBLI-580029, REP. BY DEPUTY MANAGER. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. R.R. MANE, ADV) AND: 1. ALIAHMAD MURTUJSAB RAMADURGA AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: TRANSPORT BUSINESS R/O PLOT NO. 194, 195, SECTOR NO. 2 NAVANAGAR, BAGALAKOT. 2. CHANDRA S/O HIRANASHATTI AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: TRADE R/O KUNDAPUR, DIST. DAKSHINA KANNADA. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRIYUTHS. S.B. HEBBALLI AND PRANAV UMESH BADAGI, ADVS FOR R1; NOTICE TO R2 IS HELD SUFFICIENT) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:12-09-2012 PASSED IN MVC NO.675/2008 ON THE FILE OF MEMBER, MACT.NO.II, BAGALKOT, AWARDING THE COMPENSATION OF RS.1,29,750/- WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 6% P.A., FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALISATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, THE JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Date: 2025.08.22 12:59:05 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10061 MFA No. 25715 of 2012 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI) 1. This Miscellaneous First Appeal is filed by the appellant-Insurance Company challenging the Judgment and award dated 12.09.2012 passed in MVC No.675/2008 by the learned Member, M.A.C.T.-II, Bagalkot (for short ‘the Tribunal’). 2. Brief facts, leading rise to the filing of this appeal, are as follows: It is contended that respondent No.1 herein/claimant was riding the motorcycle bearing No.KA-29/K-4566 on 22.04.2004, and was slowly proceeding from Navanagar to his place of work near Basaveshwar Circle. At that time, respondent No.2 herein came on his motorcycle, riding it rashly and negligently at a high speed and dashed against respondent No.1 herein/claimant. Due to which, respondent No.1 sustained grievous injuries. He incurred a huge amount towards medical expenses. He filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the M.V.Act seeking a - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10061 MFA No. 25715 of 2012 compensation for the injuries sustained in the road traffic accident. It is contended that respondent No.2 herein is the owner and the Appellant herein is the insurer of the offending vehicle involved in the accident. Both of them are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation to respondent No.1/ claimant herein. Hence, prays to allow the claim petition. 3. Though, a notice was issued to the respondent No. 1 - owner, despite service of notice, respondent No.1- owner remained unrepresented and was placed ex-parte before the tribunal. Respondent No.2/Insurance Company filed a statement of objections denying the averments made in the claim petition, and contended that respondent No.1 herein himself was negligent in causing the accident. It was also contended that he was riding the motorcycle bearing KA-29/K-4566 without possessing a valid and effective driving license as of the date of the accident. It was contended that the Insurance Company is not liable to compensate respondent No.1 herein. Hence, prays to - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10061 MFA No. 25715 of 2012 dismiss the claim petition against the appellant-Insurance Company. 4. The Tribunal, based on the pleadings of the parties, framed the relevant issues. 5. To substantiate his case, the petitioner/respondent No.1 herein examined himself as PW-1, examined the Doctor as PW-2, and marked 137 documents as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.137. In rebuttal, the official of the Insurance Company was examined as RW-1, but no documents were marked. The Tribunal, after recording the evidence hearing both the sides, and assessing the verbal and documentary evidence, allowed the claim petition in part vide judgment dated 12.09.2012 and held that respondent No.1/Petitioner was entitled to a compensation of Rs.1,29,750/- with proportionate costs and future interest at the rate of 6% per annum. It was also held that the owner and the Insurance Company are jointly liable to pay the compensation amount to the petitioner- respondent No.1 herein. The Appellant/Insurance - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10061 MFA No. 25715 of 2012 Company, aggrieved by the Judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, filed this appeal. 6. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the Insurance Company, and the learned counsel for respondent No.1-the claimant. 7. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company submits that, a charge sheet was filed against the rider of the motorcycle bearing KA-13/J-7211 of the and no charge sheet was filed against the rider of the motorcycle bearing No.KA-29/K-4566. He submits that the motorcycle bearing No.KA-13/J-7211 was not insured with the present appellant-Insurance Company. He submits that the Insurance Company of the motorcycle bearing No.KA-29/K-4566 is not liable to pay the compensation to respondent No.1 herein. He further submits that the Insurance Company of the motorcycle bearing No.KA- 13/J-7211 is not a party to the claim petition. Hence, he submits that the claim petition filed by respondent No.1, herein is not maintainable for non-joinder of the necessary - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10061 MFA No. 25715 of 2012 parties. He also submits that respondent No.1/claimant himself was riding the motorcycle bearing KA-29/K-4566, and he is not entitled to the compensation, as he is not a third party. The said aspect was not considered by the tribunal, and committed an error in passing the impugned Judgment. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow the appeal and set aside the Judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, and consequently, dismiss the claim petition against the Insurance Company. 8. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.1-petitioner supported the impugned Judgment and award, and submitted that, in case, the Court conclude that the Insurance Company is not liable to pay the compensation, respondent No.2 herein, be directed to pay the compensation amount. Hence, on these grounds, he prays for the disposal of the appeal. 9. Perused the records, and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. The - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10061 MFA No. 25715 of 2012 point that would arise for consideration is only concerning liability. 10. There is no dispute that the respondent No.1/petitioner met with an accident on 22.04.2004, wherein he was riding the motorcycle bearing No.KA-29/K- 4566, and respondent No.2 herein was riding the motorcycle bearing No.KA-13/J-7211, in a rash and negligent manner, and dashed to the motorcycle of respondent No.1 herein, and he sustained grievous injuries. Though, respondent No.1 herein has produced the certified copies of the FIR and complaint, marked as Ex.P.2 and Ex.P.3 also produced the charge sheet marked as Ex.P.4, which discloses that the charge sheet was filed against the rider of the motorcycle bearing No.KA-13/J- 7211. It is admitted that the said vehicle was not insured with the appellant-Insurance Company. However, the Tribunal, without considering the contents of Ex.P.4, and the fact that the charge sheet was filed against the rider of the motorcycle bearing No.KA-13/J-7211 and not against - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10061 MFA No. 25715 of 2012 the rider of the motorcycle bearing No.KA-29/K-4566, i.e., committed an error in recording its finding that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent riding of the motorcycle bearing No.KA-29/K-4566. 11. The Tribunal was not justified in recording the finding that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent riding of the rider of the motorcycle bearing No.KA-13/J-7211 and committed an error in saddling the liability on the appellant- insurance company . Admittedly, the vehicle bearing Reg No.KA 13/J-7211 was not insured with the appellant-Insurance Company, and this aspect was not considered by the Tribunal. Further, respondent No.1 himself produced the Insurance Policy of the motorcycle bearing No.KA-29/K-4566, but did not produce any Insurance Policy of the motorcycle bearing No.KA- 13/J-7211. Thus, the offending vehicle was not insured with the appellant-Insurance Company. Therefore, the claim petition is liable to be dismissed as against the - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10061 MFA No. 25715 of 2012 appellant-Insurance Company. In view of the above discussion, I proceed to pass the following order: ORDER (i) The Appeal is allowed. (ii) The Judgment and award dated 12.09.2012 passed in MVC No.675/2008 by the learned Member, M.A.C.T.-II, Bagalkot, is set aside. Consequently, the claim petition against the Insurance Company is dismissed. (iii) The amount in deposit, if any, shall be refunded to the appellant-Insurance Company forthwith. Sd/- (ASHOK S. KINAGI) JUDGE RHR/- CT: BSB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2