- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12577 MFA No. 24465 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 24465 OF 2013 (MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. SHRI. RUKUMABAI VASANT JADHAV, JADHAV, AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: VASPETH TAJATH, DIST: SANGLI, STATE: MAHARASHTRA, NOW AT DHARWAD. 2. VASANT LAKULA JADHAV AGE: 54 YEARS, OCC: NIL, R/O: VASPETH TAJATH, DIST: SANGLI, STATE: MAHARASHTRA, NOW AT DHARWAD. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. GIRISH S. HIREMATH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SHIVANAND GURSIDDAGODUA PATTANSHETTY, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: RAMAPUR SITE, SAUNDATTI, DIST: BELGAUM. 2. THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD. A.P.M.C. YARD, SAUNDATTI-591120 POLICY NO.602605/31/07/677000139 POLICY VALID FROM 28.08.2007 TO 27.08.2008 3. GANESH HATELAPPA ANNIGERI, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O.H.NO.20, MADAR ONI, M-NAGAR, DHARWAD-580006. MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12577 MFA No. 24465 of 2013 4. UMESH HATELAPPA ANNIGERI, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O.H.NO.20, MADAR ONI, M-NAGAR, DHARWAD. 5. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., APMC YARD, MRUTYUNJAYA NAGAR, DHARWAD-580006. POLICY NO.602506/31/07/600000845 POLICY VALID FROM 11.05.2007 TO 10.05.2008. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. N. R. KUPPELUR FOR R2, ADVOCATE; NOTICE TO R3 AND R4 HELD SUFFICIENT; R1 AND R5 ARE SERVED) THIS MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, 1988, PRAYING TO SET-ASIDE THE JUDGEMENT AND AWARD IN MVC NO.13/2011 DATED 05.01.2013 PASSED BY THE PRESIDING OFFICER, FAST TRACK COURT-III, DHARWAD IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI ORAL JUDGMENT This Appeal is filed by the petitioner being aggrieved by the dismissal of the claim petition, vide judgment and award dated 05.01.2013 passed in M.V.C.No.13/2011 by the learned Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court-III, Dharwad. 2. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this appeal are as follows: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12577 MFA No. 24465 of 2013 On 05.10.2007, one Shivaji S/o. Vasanth Jadhav was proceeding to his house by walk on the left side of the road with his father-in-law Gorakanath Pawar. When the said Shivaji reached near Hotel P.B. Road, the driver of Yamaha motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-24/H-2777 came in a rash and negligent manner at a high speed and dashed against the motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-25/Y-9301 which was ahead. Due to the Same, the rider of the motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-25/Y-9301 dashed to the deceased Shivaji. As a result, he sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the injuries. The petitioners, being the legal representatives of the deceased Shivaji, filed a claim petition under Section 166 of M.V. Act. Accordingly, prays to allow the claim petition. 3. Respondents No.1, 2, and 5 appeared through the counsel; However, respondents No.2 and 5 filed a statement of objections, and respondents No.3 and 4, despite the service of notice, remained unrepresented and they were placed ex parte before the Tribunal. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12577 MFA No. 24465 of 2013 4. Respondent No.2 filed a statement of objections denying the averments made in the claim petition. It is contended that there is no such accident occurred as contended by the petitioners in the claim petition, and accordingly, prays to dismiss the claim petition against respondent No.2. 5. Respondent No.5 filed a statement of objections denying the averments made in the claim petition and contended that there is no post-mortem report to show the cause of the death, and accordingly, prays to dismiss the claim petition against respondent No.5. 6. The Tribunal, based on the pleadings of the parties, framed the relevant issues. 7. The petitioners, to substantiate their case, petitioner No.2 was examined as PW-1, examined two witnesses as PW-2 and PW-3 and marked 28 documents as Exs.P-1 to P-28. Conversely, the officer of the Insurance Company was examined as RW-1, and marked three - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12577 MFA No. 24465 of 2013 documents as Exs.R-1 to R-3. One document was marked as EX.D-1. 8. The Tribunal, after assessing the verbal and documentary evidence, dismissed the claim petition vide judgment dated 05.01.2013. 9. The petitioners, aggrieved by the dismissal of the claim petition, filed this Miscellaneous First Appeal. 10. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners, and the learned counsel for respondent No.2- Insurance Company. 11. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the deceased Shivaji met with an accident, sustained grievous injuries, and he succumbed to the injuries. The petitioners are the legal representatives of the deceased Shivaji and are entitled to compensation. He also submits that the Tribunal has committed an error in dismissing the claim petition. Accordingly, he prays to allow the appeal. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12577 MFA No. 24465 of 2013 12. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent- Insurance Company submits that the petitioners have falsely implicated the vehicle, and the petitioners have failed to prove that the deceased Shivaji died due to the injuries sustained in the alleged accident. He submits that the petitioners initially filed a complaint against some other vehicle, and subsequently, they filed a subsequent complaint implicating the offending vehicle. He also submits that in the description, there are contradictions in both the complaints filed by the complainant. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to dismiss the claim petition. 13. Perused the records, and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. 14. The point that would arise for consideration is: “Whether the petitioners prove that the Tribunal has committed an error in dismissing the claim petition without considering the evidence on record?” 15. Though the petitioners contended that the deceased Shivaji died in the accident; However, the accident - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12577 MFA No. 24465 of 2013 was seriously disputed by both the Insurance Companies. Petitioner No.2 was examined as PW-1 and got marked documents at Exs.P-1 to P-28. During the cross-examination of PW-1, it was suggested that the complainant had given an original complaint against the rider of the motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-25/Y-9301. The owner and the Insurance Companies of both vehicles were made parties. From the perusal of Ex.P-2 i.e., the complaint, it is evident that the complainant has stated that the rider of the motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-25/Y-9301 has caused the accident. Subsequently, complainant changed the vehicle itself and got involved the vehicle bearing registration No.KA-24/H- 2777. It creates a doubt regarding the involvement of the vehicle i.e., vehicle bearing registration No.KA24/H-2777 in the accident. Further, the petitioners have not produced the postmortem report to establish that there was a nexus between the injuries sustained by the deceased in the alleged accident and the death of the deceased Shivaji. In the absence of the postmortem report, the petitioners have failed to establish that the deceased Shivaji died due to the injuries - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12577 MFA No. 24465 of 2013 sustained in the road traffic accident and the Tribunal was justified in recording the finding that the petitioners have falsely implicated the motorcycle and filed a claim petition on false and baseless grounds. The tribunal rightly dismissed the claim petition. I do not find any error in the impugned judgment, and I answer the point accordingly. 16. In view of the above discussions, I proceed to pass the following order : ORDER (i) The Appeal is dismissed. (ii) The judgment and award dated 05.01.2013 passed in M.V.C.No.13/2011 by the learned Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court-III, Dharwad is hereby confirmed. Sd/- (ASHOK S. KINAGI) JUDGE NAA CT:ANB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16