- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39557 MFA No. 755 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 2582 of 2015 MFA No. 2583 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 755/2014 (MV-I) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 2582/2015 (MV-D) MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 2583/2015 (MV-D) IN MFA No. 755/2014: BETWEEN: THE MANAGER, THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., NO.1576, V.V.ROAD, MANDYA, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER, BANGALORE REGIONAL OFFICE, 144, SUBHARAM COMPLEX, M.G.ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. K N SRINIVASA., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT RUKKAMMA, W/O YALAVEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/O DASEGOWDANAKOPPALU VILLAGE, CHINAKURALI HOBLI, PANDAVAPURA TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT-571 435. Digitally signed by PADMASHREE SHEKHAR DESAI Location: High Court Of Karnatka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39557 MFA No. 755 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 2582 of 2015 MFA No. 2583 of 2015 2. SRI.Y.C. SOMA, S/O CHIKKANNA, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, DRIVER OF TRACTOR BEARING NO.KA-11/T-1096 & 1097, R/O YELIYUR VILLAGE, KOTHATHI HOBLI, MANDYA TALUK-571 401. 3. H.N. NARAYANAGOWDA, S/O NANJEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, OWNER OF TRACTOR, NO.KA-11-T-1096 & 1097, HULAKEREKOPPALU VILLAGE, PANDAVAPURA TALUK, PIN-571 435. 4. LAXMINARAYAN, S/O KRISHNEGOWDA, OWNER OF TRACTOR OF KA-11-T-1096 & 1097, KAPARANAKOPPALU VILLAGE, DARASAGUPPE DAKALE, K. SETTIHALLY HOBLI, S.R.PATNA TQ. PIN-571 438. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SUGANA R REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R3, SRI. G.B. SHARATHI GOWDA, ADVOCATE, FOR R4, V/O DATED 04.10.2017 NOTICE TO R2 D/W, V/O DATED 07.01.2021 THE APPEAL AGAINST R1 DISMISSED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:23.2.2013 PASSED IN MVC NO.536/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, JMFC, MACT, PANDAVAPURA, AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39557 MFA No. 755 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 2582 of 2015 MFA No. 2583 of 2015 RS.2,27,626/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% P.A FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL PAYMENT OF THE ENTIRE AMOUNT. IN MFA NO. 2582/2015: BETWEEN: THE BRANCH MANAGER, THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD, ADI CHUNCHANAGIRI ROAD, NEAR KEB OFFICE, KUVEMPU NAGAR, MYSORE, REPT. BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER, BANGALORE REGIONAL OFFICE, 144, SUBHARAM COMPLEX, M.G. ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001. ...APPELLANT (BY SRI. SRINIVASA K N., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT JAYAMMA, W/O LATE SWAMYGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/AT HULKERE VILLAGE, PANDAVAPURA TQ, MANDYA DIST. PIN-571 434 DIED ON 18.06.2020 VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 11.11.2024 R-2 IS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF R1. 2. SRI H.S. SANTHOSH, S/O LATE SWAMYGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/AT HULKERE VILLAGE, PANDAVAPURA TQ, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39557 MFA No. 755 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 2582 of 2015 MFA No. 2583 of 2015 MANDYA DIST.-571 434. 3. SMT. LATHA, W/O PRAKASH, D/O LATE SWAMYGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, SEETHAPURA VILLAGE, PANDAVAPURA TQ, MANDYA DIST. PIN-571 434. 4. Y.C.SOMA, S/O CHIKKANNA, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, (DRIVER OF TRACTOR & TRAILER) R/O YELIYUR VILLAGE, KOTHARI HOBLI, SRIRANGAPATNA TQ, MANDYA DIST.-571 438. 5. LAKSHMI NARAYANA, S/O KRISHNA GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OWNER OF TRACTOR & TRAILER, R/O KAPARANAKOPPALU VILLAGE, K.SHETTIHALLI HOBLI, SRIRANGAPATNA TQ. MANDYA DIST.-571 438. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. BASAVAIAH C., ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3, SRI. G.B. SHARATH GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R5, R4 SERVED, V/O DATED 06.11.2024 R2 TREATED AS LRS OF R1) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:18.11.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.561/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39557 MFA No. 755 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 2582 of 2015 MFA No. 2583 of 2015 JUDGE, & JMFC, PANDAVAPURA, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF Rs.3,96,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL DEPOSIT. IN MFA NO. 2583/2015: BETWEEN: THE BRANCH MANAGER, THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., ADI CHUNCHANAGIRI ROAD, NEAR KEB OFFICE, KUVEMPU NAGAR, MYSORE, REP. BY ITS REGIOANL MANAGER, BANGALORE REGIONAL OFFICE, 144, SUBHARAM COMPLEX, M G ROAD, BANGALOR- 560 001. ...APPELLANT (BY SRI. SRINIVASA K N., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT SHIVAMMA, W/O LATE KENCHEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT HULIKEREKOPPALU VILLAGE, PANDAVAPURA TQ, MANDYA DIST., PIN-571 434. 2. SRI GURUSWAMY, S/O LATE KENCHEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS, R/AT HULIKEREKOPPALU VILLAGE, PANDAVAPURA TQ, MANDYA DIST.-571 434. 3. Y C SOMA S/O CHIKKANNA, - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39557 MFA No. 755 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 2582 of 2015 MFA No. 2583 of 2015 AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, (DRIVER OF TRACTOR & TRAILER) R/O YELIYUR VILALGE, KOTHARI HOBLI, SRIRANGAPATNA TQ., MANDYA DIST.-571 438. 4. LAKSHMI NARAYANA, S/O KRISHNA GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 40YEARS, OWNER OF TRACTOR & TRAILER, R/O KAPARANAKOPPALU VILLAGE, K SHETTIHALLI HOBLI, SRIRANGAPATNA TQ., MANDYA DIST-571 438. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. BASAVAIAH .C, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2, SRI. G.B. SHARATH GOWDA, ADVOCATE FO R4, R3 SERVED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:18.11.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.562/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, & JMFC, PANDAVAPURA, AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF Rs.4,44,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL DEPOSIT. THESE APPEALS HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED ON 09.09.2025 COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT THIS DAY, P SREE SUDHA J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39557 MFA No. 755 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 2582 of 2015 MFA No. 2583 of 2015 CAV JUDGMENT MFA No.755/2014 is filed by the respondent/Insurance Company under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, for setting aside the judgment and award dated 23.02.2013 passed in MVC No.536/2009 (Old No.2459/2005) passed by Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Pandavapura. 2. MFA No.2582/2015 & MFA No.2583/2015 are filed by the respondent/Insurance under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for setting aside the judgment and award dated 18.11.2014 passed in MVC No.561/2013 & MVC No.562/2013, respectively passed by Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Pandavapura. 3. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for respondents. 4. MFA No.755/2014 is filed by the Insurance Company. The brief facts of the case before the tribunal is that the injured claimant aged 40 years met with an accident on 20.6.2004 and she filed claim application - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39557 MFA No. 755 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 2582 of 2015 MFA No. 2583 of 2015 claiming compensation of Rs.12.5 lakhs with interest. The tribunal considering entire evidence on record granted Rs.2,27,626/- along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till deposit and it was stated that the respondent Nos.3 and 4 are owner and insurer of tractor and trailer respectively. Hence, both of them are jointly and severally liable to pay the Compensation. Hence, respondent No.4 was directed to deposit the amount. 5. MFA No.2582/2015 and MFA No.2583/2015 (arising out of the common order passed by the tribunal in MVC Nos.561/2013 and 562/2013) are also filed by the respondent/Insurance Company and the brief facts of the case before the tribunal is that on 20.05.2004 one Swamygowda and Kenchegowda along with the Rukkamma were traveling in same tractor and trailer No.KA-11-T-1096 & 1097 to work in a quarry situated near Vaddarahally village and met with an accident as a result Swamygowda and Kenchegowda died. Legal - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39557 MFA No. 755 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 2582 of 2015 MFA No. 2583 of 2015 representatives of the deceased filed claim application before the tribunal claiming compensation of Rs.23.60 lakhs and Rs.21.60 lakhs, respectively with interest. The tribunal considering entire evidence on record granted Rs.3,96,000/- and Rs.4,44,000/- with cost and interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till deposit and it was stated that respondent Nos.2 and 3 are jointly and severally liable to pay the Compensation. 6. Aggrieved by the aforementioned orders Insurance company preferred these appeals and mainly contended that the tribunal erroneously fastened the liability on the appellant. In MFA No.755/2014, arising out of MVC No.536/2009 the injured claimant was passenger in tractor and trailer. Only one person in the tractor i.e., driver of the vehicle is covered under the policy and no other persons are allowed to travel. In this case, claimant and other two persons were traveling in the tractor cum trailer. As such, appellant is not liable to indemnify the insured. They examined RW1 and also filed insurance - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39557 MFA No. 755 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 2582 of 2015 MFA No. 2583 of 2015 policy under Ex.R1, but the Tribunal erroneously fastened the liability on the appellant and thus requested for modification of the order. 7. Learned counsel for respondents relied upon the judgment in case of Mounesh Vs Thimmanna and Others reported in ILR 2011 Karnataka 2557, wherein it was held as below, “The tractor with a trailer for transportation of agricultural produce and other goods would be very much a goods vehicle. Besides such a tractor and trailer would be a goods carriage within the meaning of Section 2(14) of the Motor Vehicles Act., in which event the risk of workmen/loaders of the Tractor/Trailer is necessarily to be covered under Section 147 as an Act Policy without collecting any additional premium. In that view of the matter, the insurer would be liable to pay the entire compensation in terms of the Workmen Compensation Act”. 8. It was further argued that trailer is not an automobile unless it is attached to tractor or any other automobile. The tractor is categorized as non transport vehicle. They also relied upon the judgment in case of National Insurance Company Ltd., Vs Sri. Maruthi - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39557 MFA No. 755 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 2582 of 2015 MFA No. 2583 of 2015 and Others reported in ILR 2011 KAR 4139 in which it was held as follows: “40. The combination of tractor-trailer is nothing short of a goods carriage. Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx The claimants in the present case have rightly approached the Workmen’s Commissioner and the Commissioner was justified in holding that the injured claimants were coolies under the owner viz., the insured. In the present case, they were carrying stones for constructing a ridge in the land belonging to the insured, so as to store the water. This is nothing but part and parcel of agricultural operations. The claimants were neither gratuitious passengers nor persons who were traveling in the tractor- trailer for the purpose other than agricultural operations.” Therefore, they are rightly covered under the policy. 9. Learned counsel for the appellant relied upon the citation, in case of The Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Limited Vs Smt.Honnamma and Ors reported in SLP (Civil) No.2135/2023, in which it was held as under, “Appellant ought not to be saddled with payment of compensation exceeding what the insurance policy provides for or - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39557 MFA No. 755 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 2582 of 2015 MFA No. 2583 of 2015 the limit, if any, set under any law for the time being in force, whichever be the higher amount of the two, in the underlying factual scenario. The amount exclusively payable by the Appellant, however, shall in no case be less than Rs.9,50,000/-. We do not find any infirmity in the Impugned Order, either with regard to the quantum of compensation awarded or fixation of liability on the insurer- Appellant for the accident.” 10. In this case, on 20.6.2004 petitioners and others were going in tractor-trailer bearing No.KA-11-T-1096- 1097 to work in a quarry, but the respondent No.1, driver of the tractor driven in a rash and negligent manner and when it was climbing the quarry, the tractor-trailer turned towards back and fallen down, as a result, petitioner fell down and sustained injuries. The tribunal observed that the accident occurred during the course of employment and the insurance company is liable to pay the compensation. The main contention of the Insurance Company is that they are the gratuitious passengers. As it is a goods carriage vehicle, they are not supposed to travel in the said vehicle and it amounts to breach of - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39557 MFA No. 755 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 2582 of 2015 MFA No. 2583 of 2015 conditions of the policy and thus they are not liable to pay the compensation. 11. Admittedly, the petitioners were going in a tractor to attend a quarry work and met with an accident and sustained injuries. The respondent No.1 is driver and respondent No.3 stated that he already sold the tractor and trailer to respondent No.2, but as on the date of accident, registration certificate of tractor and trailer is in the name of respondent itself. Thus, the owner and insurer of the tractor and trailer were jointly and severally held liable. Respondent No.4 is directed to pay the entire compensation. 12. Learned counsel for appellant contended that the driver of the vehicle is only covered under the policy and other persons are not allowed to travel in the tractor and trailer. Admittedly, tractor is used for agricultural operations. The Hon’ble Supreme Court as per the judgment reported in (1988) 1 SCC 626 in case of - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39557 MFA No. 755 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 2582 of 2015 MFA No. 2583 of 2015 National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Jugal Kishore & Others has held as follows; i) that the liability of the insurer depends on the terms of the contract between the insured and the insurer contained in the policy; ii) there is no prohibition for an insured from entering into a contract of insurance covering a risk wider than the minimum requirement of the statute whereby risk to the gratuitous passenger could also be covered; and iii) in such cases where the policy is not merely Statutory policy, the terms of the policy have to be considered to determine the liability of the insurer.” 13. Therefore, this court finds that the order of the tribunal on proper appreciation of evidence and it needs no interference. As a result, these appeals are required to be dismissed. 14. In the result, the following order is passed: - 15 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39557 MFA No. 755 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 2582 of 2015 MFA No. 2583 of 2015 ORDER i. All these appeals filed by the appellant/Insurance Company are dismissed. ii. MFA No. 755 of 2014, C/W MFA No. 2582 of 2015 and MFA No. 2583 of 2015, arising out of the judgment and award dated 18.11.2014 passed in MVC Nos.561/2013 562/2013 and also in MVC No.536/2009 (Old No.2459/2005) dated 23.02.2013, passed by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Pandavapura, are hereby confirmed. iii. The claimant (respondent No.1) in MFA No.755/2014 is entitled to a sum of Rs.2,27,626/- along with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization. iv. The claimants in MFA No.2582/2015 (arising out of MVC No.561/2013) are - 16 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39557 MFA No. 755 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 2582 of 2015 MFA No. 2583 of 2015 entitled to a sum of Rs.3,96,000/- along with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization. v. The claimants in MFA No.2583/2015 (arising out of MVC No.562/2013) are entitled to a sum of Rs.4,44,000/- along with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization. vi. Appellant/Insurance Company in both the appeals are directed to deposit the said amount within one month from the date of this order, and vii. On such deposit, claimants are permitted to withdraw the entire amount along with interest accrued on the same. Sd/- (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE AKV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 51