- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11083 MFA No. 21930 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 21930 OF 2013 (MV-I) BETWEEN: 1. ILIYAS MOGAL S/O IBRAHIM MOGAL AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER R/O: KIMANI, TAL : KUMTA …APPELLANT (BY SRI. S L MATTI, ADV) AND: 1. RAGHVENDRA D NAYAK OCC: BUSINESSMAN, R/O : MORALLI (MOGATA), TAL : ANKOLA (OWNER OF TRUCK BEARING NO.KA47/2108). 2. THE MANAGER SRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD, ISSUING OFFICE AT 10003-E-8R11CO, INDUSTRIAL AREA, SITAPURA, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN. 3. KASIM AHMED MUNNA S/O AHMED DAWOOD MUNNA, R/O : KIMANI, TAL : KUMTA, (OWNER OF VEHICLE BEARING NO.KA30/5413) 4. THE MANAGER UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., HULIDEV COMPLEX, 1ST FLOOR, GIBB HIGH SCHOOL ROAD, KUMTA ( U.K) …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. NAGARAJ C. KOLLOORI, ADV FOR R2, SMT. ARUNA DESHPANDE, ADV FOR R4 AND NOTICE TO R1 & R3 ARE DISPENSED WITH) MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Date: 2025.09.10 12:26:20 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11083 MFA No. 21930 of 2013 THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:30-07-2012 PASSED IN MVC NO.16/2011 ON THE FILE OF MEMBER, ADDL. MACT. KUMTA, DISMISSING THE PETITION FILED U/SEC.163-A OF MV ACT. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, THE JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI) This appeal is filed by the claimant, challenging the judgment of dismissal of the claim petition in M.V.C.No.16/2011 dated 30.07.2012 passed by the learned Addl. M.A.C.T., Kumta. 2. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this appeal are as follows: On 24.09.2010 at about 7.30 hours, the claimant was driving Mahindra Jeep bearing registration No.KA-30/5413 from Kumta side to Ankola side on N.H. 17 in a moderate speed. When the claimant reached near Nushikote cross on N.H.17, a truck bearing registration No.KA-47/2108 driven - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11083 MFA No. 21930 of 2013 by its driver came from the opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner by overtaking the other vehicles and suddenly took his vehicle to the extreme right side of the road and collided with the said jeep. As a result, the claimant sustained grievous injuries. Hence, the claimant filed a claim petition under Section 163A of M.V. Act seeking compensation on account of injuries sustained in the road traffic accident. 3. Respondents No.1 to 4 filed separate statements of objections. 4. Respondent No.1-the owner of the offending truck filed a statement of objections contending that the claim petition filed by the claimant is not maintainable. It is denied that the petitioner was driving his Mahindra jeep bearing registration No.KA-30/5413 in a moderate speed. He also denied the occupation and income of the claimant. It is contended that the driver of the offending vehicle was possessing a valid driving license and the policy with the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11083 MFA No. 21930 of 2013 insurance company was in effect as of the date of the accident. Hence, he prayed to dismiss the claim petition against the respondent No.1. 5. Respondent No.2 filed a statement of objections denying the claim averments made in the claim petition and contended that the claim petition is bad for non-joinder of the driver of the insured vehicle. It is also contended that the accident was occurred due to the negligence on the part of the driver of the insured vehicle. Hence, prays to dismiss the entire claim petition. 6. Respondent No.3 filed a statement of objections denying the claim averments made in the claim petition and admitted the occurrence of accident and that the claimant was traveling in Mahindra jeep bearing registration No.KA- 30/5413. He also admitted that the claimant sustained injuries in the accident and contended that the owner and the insurer of the offending truck are liable to pay the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11083 MFA No. 21930 of 2013 compensation. Hence, prays to dismiss the claim petition against him. 7. Respondent No.4 filed a statement of objections denying the claim averments made in the claim petition and contended that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the claimant. It is also contended that the driver of the vehicle bearing registration No.KA-30/5413 did not possess a valid and effective driving license as of the date of accident. It is further contended that vehicle bearing registration No.KA-47/2108 belonging to respondent No.1, who was insured with respondent No.2- insurance company i.e., Sriram General Insurance Company. Hence, respondent No.4 prayed to dismiss the claim petition against respondent No.4. 8. The Tribunal, based on the pleadings of the parties, framed the issues and additional issue. 9. The claimant, to substantiate his case, examined himself as PW-1, one witness was examined PW-2 and - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11083 MFA No. 21930 of 2013 marked 17 documents as Exs.P-1 to P-17. In rebuttal, respondents only got marked 1 document as Ex.R-1. None of the respondents entered the witness box. The Tribunal, after assessing the verbal and documentary evidence, dismissed the claim petition vide judgment dated 30.07.2012. The claimant, aggrieved by the dismissal the claim petition, filed this appeal. 10. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the claimant and the learned counsel for Sriram General Insurance Company. 11. Learned counsel for the claimant submits that the claimant has let the oral and documentary evidence but the Tribunal did not consider the evidence placed on record and dismissed the claim petition without assigning any reasons on issues No.1 to 7. Thus, the judgment passed by the Tribunal is not a speaking judgment. Hence, the matter requires fresh consideration by the Tribunal. Hence, on - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11083 MFA No. 21930 of 2013 these grounds, he prays to allow the appeal and remit the matter to the Tribunal for fresh consideration. 12. Per contra, the learned counsel for Sriram General Insurance Company submits that the Tribunal was justified in passing the impugned judgment. The Tribunal has considered the evidence placed on record by the claimant. Hence, he prays to dismiss the appeal. 13. Perused the records and considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties. 14. The claimant, to substantiate his case, examined himself as PW-1 and examined the doctor as PW-2. To prove that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle, the claimant produced Ex.P-8 charge sheet. From the perusal of the judgment passed by the Tribunal, it is clear that the Tribunal has not assigned any reasons for dismissing the claim petition except assigning reason on additional issue. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for claimant - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11083 MFA No. 21930 of 2013 that the Tribunal without applying its mind has dismissed the claim petition. Thus, the judgment passed by the Tribunal is not a speaking judgment. Hence, without going into the merits of the matter, This Court is of the considered opinion that the matter requires fresh consideration. 15. In view of the above discussion, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER (i) The Miscellaneous First Appeal is allowed. (ii) The judgment dated 30.07.2012 passed in M.V.C.No.16/2011 by the learned Addl. M.A.C.T., Kumta is set aside. (iii) M.V.C.No.16/2011 is restored to its original file. (iv) The Tribunal is directed to dispose of the claim petition after assigning reasons in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible within a period of six months from the date of appearance of the parties. (v) Parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 09.10.2025. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11083 MFA No. 21930 of 2013 (vi) Office is directed to transmit the records to the Tribunal. (vii) All the contentions of the parties are kept open. Sd/- (ASHOK S. KINAGI) JUDGE NAA CT: BSB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11