- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12705 MFA No. 101013 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 101014 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101013 OF 2015 (MV-D) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101014 OF 2015 IN MFA NO.101013/2015 BETWEEN: 1. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., THE BRANCH MANAGER, BRANCH OFFICE P.B. NO.21, GOVINDA KRUPA TRUST BUILDING, II FLOOR, J.C. ROAD, SAGAR, DIST: SHIMOGA, REP THROUGH UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE, ENKAY COMPLEX, KESHWAPUR, HUBLI, REP BY ITS, DIVISIONAL MANAGER. …APPELLANT (BY SMT. PREETI SHASHANK, ADV) AND: 1. SMT. MANJULA W/O PRAKASH BALLARY, AGED: 37 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE 2. KRISHNA S/O PRAKASH BALLARY AGED 20 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT 3. RAMU S/O PRAKASH BALLARY AGED 18 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT 4. PARVATEWWA W/O BASAPPA BALLARY AGED 71 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEWIFE ALL ARE R/O KAJJARI VILLAGE TQ. RANEBENNUR, DIST. HAVERI 5. G. RANGANATH S/O GANESHAPPA SINCE DECEASED BY HIS FATHER LRS., GANESHAPPA S/O BHARAMAPPA AGE:72 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12705 MFA No. 101013 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 101014 of 2015 R/O. ESSUR, TQ. SHIKARIPURA DIST. SHIMOGA (OWNER OF THE VEHICLE BEARING NO.KA-15/H-6821) OCC. STUDENT …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.H. PATIL, ADV FOR R2 TO R4, NOTICE TO R1 IS SERVED NOTICE TO R5 IS HELD SUFFICIENT) THIS MFA FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 19.04.2013 PASSED IN MVC NO.564/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MEMBER, ADDL. MACT, RANEBENNUR, AWARDING THE COMPENSATION OF RS.2,83,400/- WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE DATE OF REALISATION ALONG WITH ACCRUED INTEREST THERE ON WITHIN 30 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS ORDER IN BOTH CASES. IN MFA NO.101014/2015 BETWEEN: 1. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., THE BRANCH MANAGER, BRANCH OFFICE P.B. NO.21, GOVINDA KRUPA TRUST BUILDING, II FLOOR, J.C. ROAD, SAGAR, DIST: SHIMOGA, REPRESENTED THROUGH, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE, ENKAY COMPLEX, KESHWAPUR, HUBBALLI, REP BY ITS, DIVISIONAL MANAGER. …APPELLANT (BY SMT. PREETI SHASHANK, ADV) AND: 1. SRI. HALESH @ HALAPPA S/O. MARDEPPA BELLARI AGED: 45 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE R/O. BANNIHATTI, BYADAGI, NOW AT KAJJARI, DIST: HAVERI. 2. G. RANGANATH S/O. GANESHAPPA - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12705 MFA No. 101013 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 101014 of 2015 SINCE DECEASED BY HIS FATHER LRS GANESHAPPA S/O. BHARAMAPPA AGE: 72 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE R/O. ESSUR, TQ: SHIKARIPURA DIST: SHIMOGA (OWNER OF THE VEHICLE BEARING NO.KA-15/H-6821) OCC. STUDENT. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.H. PATIL, ADV FOR R1 NOTICE TO R2 IS HELD SUFFICIENT) THIS MFA FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 19.04.2013 PASSED IN MVC NO.484/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MEMBER, ADDL. MACT, RANEBENNUR, AWARDING THE COMPENSATION OF RS.1,16,000/- ALONG WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ITS REALISATION. THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI ORAL ORDER 1. These Appeals are filed by the Insurance Company challenging the common judgment and award dated 19.04.2013 passed in MVC No.564 of 2009 and 484 of 2010. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12705 MFA No. 101013 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 101014 of 2015 2. Brief facts, leading rise to the filing of these appeals are as follows: 3. One Prakash i.e., the deceased and the petitioner in MVC No.484 of 2010 met with an accident on 23.03.2009, when they were proceeding on a motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-27/L-9622, which collided with the motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-15/H-6821. Prakash sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the injuries on spot. The legal representatives of the deceased Prakash filed a claim petition in MVC No.564 of 2009 seeking compensation for the death of the deceased in a road traffic accident, and the petitioner, who sustained grievous injuries, filed a claim petition in MVC No.484 of 2010. Accordingly, prays to allow the claim petition. 4. A notice was issued to the owner of the offending vehicle. He appeared and filed a statement of objections denying the averments made in the claim - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12705 MFA No. 101013 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 101014 of 2015 petition and contended that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the deceased. Accordingly prays to dismiss the claim petition against him. 5. The insurance company filed a statement of objections and contended that there is no charge-sheet on the insured vehicle, the insured, and making the insurer of the motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-15/H-6821 amounts to misjoinder of necessary parties. Hence, prays to dismiss the claim petitions. 6. The Tribunal, clubbed both the claim petitions and framed the common issues. 7. Petitioner No.1 in MVC No.564 of 2009 was examined as PW-1, and the petitioner in MVC No.484 of 2010 was examined as PW-2, they examined the doctor as PW-3 and marked 15 documents as Exhibits P-1 to P-15. 8. In rebuttal, the respondents, i.e, the owner and the insurance company, examined three witnesses as RW-1 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12705 MFA No. 101013 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 101014 of 2015 to RW-3, and marked six documents as Exhibits R-1 to R-6. 9. The Tribunal, after assessing the verbal and documentary evidence, allowed the claim petitions in part vide judgment dated 19.04.2013 and awarded a compensation of ₹2,83,400/- in MVC No.564 of 2009 and ₹1,16,000/- in MVC No.484 of 2010 with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of the petition till its realisation. 10. It is held that the owner and insurance company are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation amount at the rate of 50% and respondent No.2, i.e., the insurance company, was directed to deposit 50% amount along with the accrued interest. 11. The insurance company, aggrieved by the impugned judgment, filed these appeals. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12705 MFA No. 101013 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 101014 of 2015 12. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the insurance company, and the learned counsel for the petitioners. 13. The learned counsel for the insurance company submits that as of the date of the accident, the vehicle was not insured with the insurance company, and to establish the case of the insurance company, the insurance company has produced Exhibit R-2 which discloses that, on verification, the insurance company through its policy has not covered the above vehicle and has not issued any policy. The Tribunal did not consider Exhibit R-2 and committed an error in fastening the liability on the insurance company. Hence, on these grounds, she prays to allow the appeals. 14. Per contra, the learned counsel for the petitioners supported the impugned judgment and award and accordingly, prays to dismiss the appeals. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12705 MFA No. 101013 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 101014 of 2015 15. A notice was issued to the owner of the offending vehicle. Despite the service of notice, the owner remained unrepresented before this court in both the appeals. 16. Perused the records, and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. 17. The point that would arise for consideration is regarding the liability. 18. There is no dispute regarding the occurrence of the accident, the death of one Prakash and the petitioner in MVC No.484 of 2010 sustaining grievous injuries in a road traffic accident. To prove that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving by the drivers of the offending vehicles, the petitioners have produced a charge sheet marked as Exhibit P-8. The abated charge sheet is filed against the deceased. Both of them have contributed for the cause of accident. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12705 MFA No. 101013 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 101014 of 2015 Reg. Liability: 19. The insurance company has taken a specific defense in the statement of objections, contending that the said vehicle was not insured with the insurance company as of the date of the accident. 20. To prove that the said vehicle was not insured with the insurance company, the officer of the insurance company was examined as RW-1 who has deposed that as of the date of accident, the vehicle was not insured with the insurance company and he has also produced Exhibit R-2, which discloses that, on verification of the proposal form, that the premium was not paid and the vehicle was not insured and no such records are found in the office. 21. The Tribunal, without considering Exhibit R-2, has proceeded to pass the impugned judgment, presuming as if the said vehicle was insured with the insurance company. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12705 MFA No. 101013 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 101014 of 2015 22. Under Section 149 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, it is the duty of the petitioner or the owner of the vehicle to furnish all such particulars to show that the offending vehicle was insured on the relevant date. It is not for the insurance company to prove that the vehicle was not insured with them. 23. Admittedly, in the instant case, neither the petitioners nor the owner of the offending vehicle, despite participating in the proceedings before the Tribunal, has not produced the policy of insurance to establish that the offending vehicle was insured with the insurance company i.e, the appellant herein and the policy was valid as of the date of the accident. 24. Hence, as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the insurance company, there was no insurance policy as of the date of accident. This Court is of the considered view that as of the date of the accident, the offending vehicle was not insured with the insurance - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12705 MFA No. 101013 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 101014 of 2015 company and the Tribunal committed an error in fastening the liability on the insurance company. In view of the same, the point regarding liability is answered accordingly. 25. In view of the above discussion, I proceed to pass the following order: ORDER (I) The Miscellaneous First Appeals are allowed. (II) The judgment and award passed by the Tribunal in MVC No.564 of 2009 and 484 of 2010 dated 19.04.2013 by the learned Additional Senior Civil Judge and Additional MACT, Ranebennur, is partly set aside and the claim petitions against the insurance company are dismissed. - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12705 MFA No. 101013 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 101014 of 2015 (III) The owner of the offending vehicle is directed to deposit the compensation amount with accrued interest, awarded by the Tribunal within 8 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. (IV) The amount deposited by the insurance company is directed to be refunded in favour of the insurance company. (V) The office is directed to transmit the TCRs to the Tribunal, forthwith. Sd/- (ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE RKK/ kmv CT: BSB