- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25883 MFA No. 2902 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 2902 OF 2019 (ECA) BETWEEN: 1. BHAGYAMMA W/O LATE KRISHNAMURTHY, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, 2. K. AISHWARYA D/O LATE KRISHNAMURTHY, AGE 8 YEARS, (NOTE: A2 IS MINOR SINCE REPRESENTED BY HER NATURAL GUARDIAN MOTHER-A1) ALL ARE R/O T. B. GOLLARAHATTI, MASKAL POST, HIRIYUR TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 572 143 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. R. SHASHIDHARA ., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. H. K. MANIKYAMMA W/O ASHWATHNARAYAN, AGE 43 YEARS, OWNER OF LORRY BEARING NO. KA-05/AB-6537, PROP M/S QUALITY PACKERS AND MOVERS, R/O NO -2386, PANCHAVATI 7TH MAIN, 22ND CROSS, BSK 2ND STAGE, BANGALORE - 560050. Digitally signed by NIRMALA DEVI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25883 MFA No. 2902 of 2019 2. THE MANAGER, BAJAJ ALIENS, GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., GOLDEN HIEGHTS, 4TH FLOOR, NO. 1/2, 58TH CROSS, 4TH M BLOCK, RAJAJINAGARA, BANGALORE - 10. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VINAY J.S., ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI.B.PRADEEP, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS MFA FILED U/S 30(1) OF ECA ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 05.01.2019 PASSED IN ECA NO.42/16 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE& ADDITIONAL MACT, JMFC, HIRIYUR, DISMISSING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA ORAL JUDGMENT The above appeal is filed calling in question the judgment and award dated 05.01.2019 passed in ECA No.42/2016 by the Senior Civil Judge & JMFC and Addl. MACT, Hiriyur1. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred as per their rank before the Trial Court. 3. The relevant facts in a nutshell leading to the present appeal are that claiming compensation for the death of 1 Hereinafter referred as to 'Tribunal' - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25883 MFA No. 2902 of 2019 one Krishnamurthy2, the appellants /claimants being the wife and daughter of the deceased filed a petition under Section 22 of the Employment Compensation Act, 19233, contending, inter alia, that on 08.03.2015 when the deceased, who was under the employment of his employer, (Respondent No.1 before the Tribunal) was driving the lorry bearing No. KA-05-AB-6537 owned by the employer, the same met with an accident, where under the deceased sustained grievous injury and succumbed to the same. 4. The employer of the deceased who was also the owner of the vehicle was arrayed as respondent No.1 and the insurer of the vehicle was arraigned as respondent No.2 before the Tribunal. The respondent No.1- owner /employer did not enter appearance before the Tribunal and was placed exparte. The respondent No.2 insurer entered appearance before the Tribunal and filed statement of objections denying the averments made in the claim petition. However, the insurer admitted having issued the policy of insurance in respect of the insured lorry bearing No. KA-05-AB-6537. The claimant No.1 2 Hereinafter referred as to 'deceased' 3 Hereinafter referred as to 'Act' - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25883 MFA No. 2902 of 2019 was examined as PW.1 and (Ex.P.1 to P.7) documents were marked in the evidence. No oral or documentary evidence was adduced on behalf of the respondents. The Tribunal vide judgment and order dated 05.01.2019 dismissed the claim petition. Being aggrieved, the present appeal is filed by the appellants/claimants. 5. Heard submissions of Sri R.Shashidhara, learned counsel for the appellants, Sri Vinay.J.S., learned counsel for respondent No.1 and Sri.Pradeep.B., learned counsel for the respondent No.2. 6. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the claimants that the Tribunal, erroneously noticing the number of the vehicle mentioned in the charge sheet i.e., vehicle bearing No.KA-05-UB-6557 has recorded a finding that the charge sheeted vehicle is not the insured vehicle and hence, dismissed the claim petition. It is further contended that having regard to the fact that in all other police records the insured vehicle i.e., lorry bearing No. KA-05-AB-6537 having been correctly mentioned, the mentioning of the vehicle bearing number KA- 05-AB-6537 in the charge sheet (Ex.P.7) appears to be a typographical error and the claimants would examine the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25883 MFA No. 2902 of 2019 investigating officer in order to explain the said typographical error. 7. It is further contended on behalf of the claimants that even the Insurer has not taken the contention that the insured vehicle has not met with an accident. Hence, learned counsel for the appellants/claimants seeks for allowing of the appeal and remanding the matter to Tribunal to enable the claimants to examine the investigating officer so as to depose regarding the erroneous mentioning of the vehicle number in the charge sheet. 8. Per contra learned counsel for the insurer justifies the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal. 9. Having regard to the contentions put forth by both the learned counsels the above appeal is admitted to consider the following substantial question of law. i. Whether the dismissal of the claim petition by the Tribunal by noticing that the charge sheet has been filed against vehicle No. KA-05-UB-6557 is just and proper? 10. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the claimant, in all other police records including the motor vehicle accident report (Ex.P.4), complaint (Ex.P.1), the details of the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25883 MFA No. 2902 of 2019 vehicle have been mentioned as lorry bearing No. KA-05-AB- 6537. Only in the charge sheet (Ex.P.7) the number of the vehicle is mentioned as KA-05-UB-6557. 11. The Tribunal while recording the finding that the investigation has shown some other vehicle, which has not been clarified to the petitioners, has noticed the number of the vehicle mentioned in the charge sheet as KA-05-UB-6557, where as in other documents it is shown as KA-05-AB-6537. 12. In view of the above mentioned factual situation, the contention put forth on behalf of the appellants/claimants seeking for the remand is liable to be accepted, in order to afford an opportunity to the claimants to adduce the evidence of the investigating officer. 13. The interests of the insurer and owner would also be safeguarded having regard to the fact that they will have an opportunity to cross examine any witness examined on behalf of the claimants. 14. In view of the aforementioned discussions, the substantial question of law is answered in the Negative. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25883 MFA No. 2902 of 2019 15. Hence, the following; ORDER i) The above appeal is allowed; ii) The judgment and award dated 05.01.2019 passed in ECA No.42/2016 by the Senior Civil Judge & JMFC and Addl. MACT, Hiriyur is set aside; iii) The parties shall appear before the Court of the Senior Civil Judge & JMFC & Addl. MACT, Hiriyur, in ECA No.42/2016, on 11.08.2025, without the requirement of any further notice being issued in this regard; iv) Pursuant to the appearance of the parties, the Tribunal shall afford an opportunity to the parties to lead further evidence and conduct further proceedings in accordance with law; v) All contentions of the parties kept open; vi) Records to be transmitted to the Tribunal forthwith. Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE SRK/-List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24