- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22565 MFA No. 7760 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 7760 OF 2016 (MV- D) BETWEEN: NEW INDIA ASSURENCE CO.LTD., NO.13/2, II MAIN, TEMPLE STREET, V.V. MOHALLA, MYSORE - 570 002. …APPELLANT (BY SMT. MAMATHA S. SHANKAR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SANMATHI E.I., ADVOCATE ) AND: 1. SMT. B.S. RANI, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, MADAPATNA VILLAGE, KUSHALNAGARA HOBLI, SOMWARPET TALUK, KODAGU DISTRICT- 571 236. 2. SRI. RAVI, SON OF LATE KRISHNAIAH, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, DODDAKOPPALU VILLAGE, MUNDOORU POST, SALIGRAMA HOBLI, K.R. NAGAR TALUK MYSORE DISTRICT.- 571 602. Digitally signed by ANNAPURNA G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22565 MFA No. 7760 of 2016 3. K.S. BASAPPA SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, SON OF LATE SANGANNA SHETTY, SANTHEBEEDI, KERALAPURA, RAMANATHAPURA HOBLI, ARAKALGUD TALUK, HASSAN DIST.- 573 102. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. CHARAN KUMAR K.V.,ADVOCATE FOR R1, R2 AND R3 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:05.08.2016 PASSED IN MVC NO.5/14 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & MACT, MADIKERI, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.5,03,000/- WITH INTEREST AT 9% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE DATE OF DEPOSIT. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the insurer - respondent No.3 challenging the judgment and award dated 05.08.2016 passed by MACT, Senior Civil Judge, Madikeri in MVC.No.5/2014 (for short 'the Tribunal'). 2. The parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Tribunal. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22565 MFA No. 7760 of 2016 3. The brief facts of the case are that on 09.03.2013, the deceased Annaiah met with an accident due to rash and negligent driving of the lorry bearing registration No.KA-09-D-6424 by its driver. As a result, he sustained fatal injuries and died at the spot. It is further the case of the claimant that the deceased was a vendor of tender coconut and he was aged about 58 years. He was earning Rs.12,000/- per month and maintaining the family. The claimant is the wife of the deceased. With these reasons, prayed to award compensation of Rs.12 lakhs. 4. Respondent No. 1 is the driver, Respondent No. 2 is the owner, and Respondent No. 3 is the insurer of the offending vehicle. Respondent No. 1, in his written statement, denied the contentions of the claim petition, denied the occurrence of the accident, and prayed for dismissal of the claim petition. Respondent No. 3 denied the contentions of the claim petition, denied its liability to pay compensation, and further contended that the driver - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22565 MFA No. 7760 of 2016 of the offending vehicle did not hold a valid and effective driving license for the said class of vehicle. 5. Based on the rival contentions of the parties, the Tribunal framed the necessary issues. 6. The claimant to prove her case, examined two witnesses as PW-1 and PW-2 and marked documents as Exs. P1 to P11. Respondent No. 2 examined one witness as RW-1 and marked documents as Exs. R1 to R3. The Tribunal, after hearing both parties, held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving by the vehicle’s driver. The Tribunal assessed the deceased’s age as 68 years, his income as Rs. 7,000/- per month, deducted 50% towards personal expenses, applied multiplier ‘9’, and awarded following amount of compensation: Sl.No. Particulars Amount (in Rs.) 1. Loss of consortium 1,00,000 2. Funeral expenses 25,000 3. Loss of dependency 3,78,000 Total 5,03,000 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22565 MFA No. 7760 of 2016 7. The Tribunal also rejected the contention of respondent No.3 that driver of the offending lorry was not holding valid and effective driving license and directed respondent Nos.1 and 3 jointly and severaly liable to pay the compensation. The same is challenged in the present appeal. 8. Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently contended that the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is excessive. Further, it was contended that Respondent No. 3 had taken a specific defense that the driver of the lorry did not possess a valid and effective driving license. To prove this, RW-1 was examined, and documents were produced. The charge sheet revealed that the driver was charge sheeted under Sections 3 read with Section 181 of the Motor Vehicles Act (hereinafter ‘the Act’), indicating that he had no valid and effective driving license to drive the vehicle. Despite these materials, the Tribunal erroneously fastened liability on the insurer to pay compensation, which is erroneous. Therefore, prayed - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22565 MFA No. 7760 of 2016 to modify the amount of compensation as well as exonerate the liability of respondent No.3 to pay the compensation. 9. The Learned counsel for the claimants supported the impugned judgment. It was further submitted that due to poverty, the claimant has not filed any appeal and that the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is meager and does not call for interference. It was also submitted that merely filing a charge sheet against the driver is insufficient to prove that he did not have a license to drive the vehicle. Respondent No. 3 failed to examine the concerned RTO or investigating officer. He further submitted that even if the driver had no license, the insurance company is liable to pay the compensation and it is at liberty to recover the same from its owner and it is not fundamental breach of policy condition. With these reasons, prayed to dismiss the appeal. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22565 MFA No. 7760 of 2016 10. The fact of the accident is not in dispute. The Tribunal rightly held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving by the driver. Therefore, there is no need to reconsider this finding. 11. Upon re-appreciation of the materials, it is found that the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side. However, since no appeal has been filed by the respondent, there is no necessity to reconsider the same. 12. It is true that the driver of the offending vehicle was charge sheeted under Sections 134(a), (b), 187, and 3 read with Section 181 of the Motor Vehicles Act, indicating that he did not have a valid and effective driving license. However, Respondent No. 3 – the insurer – did not take further steps to prove this assertion conclusively. It is now a settled principle of law that driving a vehicle without a valid driving license does not amount to a fundamental breach of the insurance policy. Therefore, the - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22565 MFA No. 7760 of 2016 insurer is liable to pay compensation to the claimant and is entitled to recover the amount from the owner of the vehicle in appropriate proceedings. 13. The insurer also contended that amount of interest awarded is exorbitant. Therefore, prayed to reduce it to 6%. Awarding of the interest is discretionary power of the Tribunal. By exercising the discretion it has awarded interest @ 9% per annum. It cannot be called as exorbitant. 14. For the aforesaid discussion, I pass the following: ORDER i. The appeal is allowed in part. ii. The impugned judgment and award dated 05.08.2016 passed by the Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Madikeri in MVC.No.5/2014 is modified. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22565 MFA No. 7760 of 2016 iii. Respondent No.3 is liable to pay the compensation and it is at liberty to recover the same from respondent No.2 in appropriate proceedings on proving that driver of the offending vehicle had no valid and effective driving license. iv. The respondent No.3 - insurance company shall deposit the amount within a period of six weeks from the date of award. v. Remaining portion of the judgment passed by the Tribunal is not disturbed. vi. Amount in deposit, if any, shall be transmitted to the Tribunal for disbursement. Send back the trial Court records along with a copy of this judgment. Draw decree accordingly. SD/- (UMESH M ADIGA) JUDGE AG, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 37