- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32837 MFA No. 3859 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 2826 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 3859 OF 2020 (MV-D) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 2826 OF 2020 (MV-D) IN MFA No. 3859/2020 BETWEEN: 1. SEETHA BAI W/O LATE KRISHNA NAIK, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, HOUSE WIFE 2. RAVINDRA NAIK S/O LATE KRISHNA NAIK, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, BOTH ARE R/O MARIYAMMANAHALLI THANDA VILLAGE, HOSPETE TALUK, BELLARY DISTRICT- 583 201 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. R.SHASHIDHARA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MASTHIGOUDA S/O CHEKKEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, DRIVER OF CAR BEARING NO. KA-17/N-4734, R/O BHAGATH SINGH NAGAR, 25TH WARD, DOOR NO.671/73, 8TH CROSS, DAVANAGERE -577 001 Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32837 MFA No. 3859 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 2826 of 2020 2. RAJENDRA G.S., S/O SHIVALINGAPPA, AGED 48 YEARS, OWENER OF CAR BEARING NO. KA-17/N-4734, 4/O NO.1905/44, SHAMANUR BADAVANE, VIDYA NAGAR, DAVANAGERE -577 001 3. THE MANAGER NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., BY ITS DIVISIONAL OFFICE, MELAGIRI PLAZA, DENTAL COLLEGE ROAD, DAVANAGERE -577 001 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.L.SREEKANTA RAO, ADVOCATE FOR R3 V/O/DATED: 15/11/2022- NOTICE TO R1 & R2 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:14.1.2019, PASSED IN MVC NO.317/2019, ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MEMBER, MACT-IV, DAVANAGERE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. IN MFA NO. 2826/2020 BETWEEN: THE MANAGER NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED DIVISONAL OFFICE MELAGIRI PLAZA DENTAL COLLEGE ROAD DAVANGERE NOW REPRESENTED BY G SHIVA KUMAR ASSISTANT MANAGER REGIONAL OFFICE NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. THIRD FLOOR, SUBRAM COMPLEX M.G.ROAD BENGALURU-560 001 ...APPELLANT - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32837 MFA No. 3859 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 2826 of 2020 (BY SRI. L SREEKANTA RAO, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SEETHA BAI W/O LATE KRISHNA NAIR AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS 2. RAVINDRA NAIK S/O LATE KRISHNA NAIR AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS BOTH ARE R/O MARIYAMMANAHALLI THANDA VILLAGE, HOSPETE TALUK BELLARY DISTRICT-583 222 3. MASTHI GOUDA S/O CHEKKEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS DOOR NO.671/73, 25TH WARD 8TH CROSS DAVANGERE-577 002 4. RAJENDRA G.S., S/O SHIVALINGAPPA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/O NO.1905/44 SHAMANUR BADAVANE VIDYANAGAR DAVANGERE-577 005 ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. R.SHASHIDHARA, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2 V/O/DATED: 28/07/2022- NOTICE TO R3 IS DISPENSED WITH SRI.BASAVARAJA PATEL G.K., ADVOCATE FOR R4) THIS MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 14.11.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO. 317/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MEMBER, MACT-IV, DAVANAGERE, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.8,40,000/- WITH INTEREST AT 8 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32837 MFA No. 3859 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 2826 of 2020 THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL JUDGMENT Aggrieved by the award passed in MVC.No.317/2019 dated 14.11.2019 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and Member, MACT-IV, Davanagere, whereby the Tribunal had granted compensation of an amount Rs.8,40,000/-, both the Insurance Company as well as the claimants are before this Court. The claimants have filed MFA.No.3859/2020 seeking enhancement of the compensation and Insurance Company has filed MFA.No.2826/2020. 2. The facts of the case are that on 15.02.2019 at about 9:00 p.m., in the night the deceased left his house in order to go to Nandibandi village, at about 10:00 p.m., while he was going on the left side of the road, in order to go to car festival at Nandibandi village, at the relevant time, the driver of the car came from M.M.Hally side by driving the car in high speed, rash and negligent manner and dashed to the deceased. As a result of which the deceased fell down on the road. Due to grievous injury on his vital parts of the body, he died on the spot. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32837 MFA No. 3859 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 2826 of 2020 3. Learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company submits that the involvement of the vehicle itself is doubtful. For this purpose, he has relied on Exs.P2, P4 and P5. As per the case of the complainant who is none other than the brother of the deceased, he was informed by the Police that the deceased met with an accident and accordingly he came to the Police Station and gave a complaint on 16.02.2019. As per the said complaint, it is a case of hit and run. Then on 16.02.2019, in the evening, restatement of complaint is given wherein it is stated about a car and its driver that is involved in the accident. Ex.P4 is the vehicle seizure mahazar, where the driver himself states that on 15.02.2019 in the evening, he hit the person walking on the road. Learned counsel submits that this vehicle is implicated in this case only for the purpose of claiming the compensation. The claimants have not taken any steps to prove the case that the deceased was hit by the driver of the insured vehicle. It is submitted that without any basis, basing on the charge sheet, the Tribunal had granted compensation. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32837 MFA No. 3859 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 2826 of 2020 4. Learned counsel appearing for the claimants submits that the charge sheet is filed against the driver of the offending vehicle. The charge sheet is not questioned and that itself shows the involvement of the vehicle. It is submitted that Exs.P2, P4 and P5 supports the case of the claimants and the Tribunal had rightly considered and granted compensation. He submits that the compensation that is awarded is not a reasonable compensation and they are seeking enhancement of the compensation. 5. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the entire material on record. This Court has perused Exs.P2, P4 and P5 and this Court finds force in the argument of the learned counsel for the Insurance Company. When it is the case of hit and run and the vehicle is unknown, by 16.02.2019, it is stated that vehicle is involved and it is confessed to the Police that the driver of the vehicle has hit the deceased and the vehicle is involved. In support of their case, the claimants neither examined the brother who is the complainant nor the Investigating Officer. When a petition is filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act, the burden lies on the claimants to - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32837 MFA No. 3859 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 2826 of 2020 prove that the accident had taken place because of the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle. In this case, the evidence on record do not inspire confidence in the mind of the Court. In that view of the matter, balancing the interest of both the parties, this Court deems it appropriate to remand the matter and at this stage, this Court is not inclined to go into the aspect of enhancement. 6. Accordingly, MFA.No.3859/2020 filed by the claimants and MFA.No.2826/2020 filed by the Insurance Company is allowed and the order passed in MVC.No.317/2019 dated 14.11.2019 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and Member, MACT-IV, Davanagere, is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Tribunal for fresh consideration. i. Both the sides are at liberty to adduce evidence, if any, and based on the evidence, the Tribunal shall pass appropriate orders. ii. The amount in deposit shall be forthwith transmitted to the Tribunal and shall be kept in a fixed deposit. iii. Registry is directed to return the Trial Court Records to the Tribunal, along with certified copy of the order passed by this Court forthwith without any delay. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32837 MFA No. 3859 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 2826 of 2020 iv. No costs. v. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE MEG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19