- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12400 MFA No. 100928 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 100543 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 100928 OF 2018 (MV-D) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 100543 OF 2018 BETWEEN: THE BRANCH MANAGER, THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD., ASHOK NAGAR, NIPPANI, REPRESENTED BY THE AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. G. N. RAICHUR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. SURESH S/O. CHANNAPPA PATTANSHETTI, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCC: NOT STATED, R/O: KERUR VILLAGE, TQ: CHIKODI, DIST: BELAGAVI. 2. SMT. BASAVVA W/O. SURESH PATTNANSHETTI, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC: NOT STATED, R/O: KERUR VILLAGE, TQ: CHIKODI, DIST: BELAGAVI. 3. SHRI. SHANTAGOUDA S/O. NEMAGOUDA PATIL, AGED ABOUT MAJOR, MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12400 MFA No. 100928 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 100543 of 2018 R/O: HARUGERI VILLAGE, TQ: RAIBHAG, DIST: BELAGAVI. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SOURABH MIRJI, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SHIVARAJ S. BALLOLI, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2: NOTICE TO R3 IS HELD SUFFICIENT) THIS MFA FILED U/S.173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS AND HEAR THE PARTIES AND MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 30.11.2017 PASSED BY THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDL. MACT AT CHICKODI IN M.V.C. NO. 2876/2013 BY EXONERATING THE APPELLANT INSURANCE COMPANY FROM THE LIABILITY AND REDUCING THE COMPENSATION BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL WITH COST IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. IN MFA NO.100543/2018 BETWEEN: 1. SURESH S/O. CHANNAPPA PATTANSHETTI AGE: 55 YRS, OCC: NIL, R/O. KERUR VILLAGE, TAL:CHIKODI, DIST:BELAGVI-590001. 2. SMT. BASAVVA W/O. SURESH PATTANSHETTI AGE:55 YRS, OCC:H/W, R/O. KERUR VILLAGE, TAL:CHIKODI, DIST:BELAGVI-590001. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. SOURABH MIRJI, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SHIVRAJ S. BALLOLI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SHRI. SHANTGOUDA S/O. NEMAGOUDA PATIL, AGE: MAJOR, R/O. HARUGERI VILLAGE, TAL:RAIBAG, DIST:BELAGAVI-590001. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12400 MFA No. 100928 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 100543 of 2018 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., ASHOK NAGAR NIPPANI, TAL and DIST:BELAGAVI-590001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. G.N.RAICHUR, ADVOCATE FOR R2; R1-SERVED) THIS MFA FILED U/S.173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 30.11.2017 PASSED IN MV.C. NO.2876/2013 ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL M.A.C.T CHIKODI AND ENHANCE THE ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION BY ALLOWING THE APPEAL TO MEET THE JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI ORAL JUDGMENT These Appeals are filed under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the M.V Act’ for short) by the petitioners and the Insurance Company, challenging the judgment and award dated 30.11.2017 passed in MVC No.2876/2013 by the learned Senior Civil Judge and Additional MACT, Chikkodi. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12400 MFA No. 100928 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 100543 of 2018 2. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of these appeals are as follows: One Sri. Sangamesh Suresh Pattanashetti was returning home on a motorcycle bearing registration No.KA- 48-H/ 6937, and when he reached near the accident spot, at that time, the driver of the Maxi Cab (cruiser) bearing registration No.KA-23-A-2834 drove it in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the motorcycle. As a result, Sangamesh sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the injuries. The petitioners are the legal representatives of the deceased Sangamesh, filed a claim petition claiming compensation on account of the death of deceased Sangamesh in a road traffic accident. Accordingly, prays to allow the claim petition. 3. The owner of the offending vehicle has filed a statement of objection denying the averments made in the claim petition and contended that the driver of the offending vehicle possessed a valid and effective driving license, as of - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12400 MFA No. 100928 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 100543 of 2018 the date of the accident, and the vehicle was insured with the Insurance Company and the policy was in force. The Insurance Company is liable to indemnify the owner of the offending vehicle. Hence, prays to dismiss the claim petition against the owner of the offending vehicle. 4. The Insurance Company filed a statement of objections denying the averments made in the claim petition and contended that the driver of the offending vehicle did not possess a valid and effective driving license as of the date of the accident. There is a breach of policy conditions. Hence, prays to dismiss the claim petition against the insurance company. 5. The tribunal, based on the pleadings of the parties, framed the relevant issues. 6. The petitioners, to substantiate their case, petitioner No. 2 was examined as PW.1 and marked 24 documents as Exs.P1 to P24. The respondents before the tribunal, i.e., neither the owner nor the insurance company - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12400 MFA No. 100928 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 100543 of 2018 have entered the witness box, and no documents were marked. 7. The tribunal, after assessing the verbal and documentary evidence, allowed the claim petition in part with costs vide judgment dated 30.11.2017 and awarded a compensation of Rs.7,68,000/- with interest at the rate of 8% p.a. from the date of the petition till its realization and held that the owner and insurance company are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation, and further, held that mother of the deceased is entitled to compensation to the extent of 90% and the father of the deceased is entitled to compensation to the extent of 10%. 8. The insurance company, being aggrieved by the liability, filed an appeal in MFA No. 100928/2018. The petitioners, being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation, filed an appeal in MFA No.100543 of 2018, seeking enhancement of compensation. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12400 MFA No. 100928 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 100543 of 2018 9. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the insurance company and the learned counsel for the petitioners. 10. The learned counsel for the insurance company submits that the driver did not possess a valid and effective driving license as of the date of the accident and the police have filed a charge sheet against the driver of the offending vehicle for the offence punishable under Sections 338 and 304A of IPC, read with Section 3, and 181 of MV Act. He submits that as of the date of the accident, the vehicle was driven by a person who did not possess a valid and effective driving licence. There is a breach of policy conditions. The said aspects were not adequately considered by the tribunal and committed an error in fastening the liability on the Insurance Company. Therefore, on these grounds, he prays to allow the appeal filed by the Insurance Company, and to dismiss the appeal filed by the petitioners. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12400 MFA No. 100928 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 100543 of 2018 11. Per contra, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that as of the date of accident, the vehicle was insured by the insurance company. He submits that if there is any violation of policy conditions, the insurance company is liable to indemnify the owner at the first instance and recover the same from the owner of the offending vehicle. 12. To buttress his argument, he has placed reliance on the judgment of the Full Bench of this court in the case of NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, BIJAPUR, BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER VS. YELLAVVA AND ANOTHER, reported in ILR 2020 KAR 2239. He submits that if this court concludes that the claim petition filed against the insurance company is liable to be dismissed, he submits that the insurance company be directed to pay the compensation amount at first instance and then recover the same from the owner of the offending vehicle. He further submits that the amount of the compensation awarded by the tribunal is on the lower side. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow the appeal - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12400 MFA No. 100928 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 100543 of 2018 filed by the petitioners and dismiss the appeal filed by the insurance company. 13. Perused the records, and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. 14. The points that would arise for consideration are regarding the liability and the quantum of compensation. 15. There is no dispute regarding the occurrence of the accident and the death of the victim Sangamesh in the road traffic accident. The petitioners, to prove the accident produced a charge sheet marked as Ex.P11, which discloses that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle and the tribunal was justified in answering issue No. 2 in the affirmative. Reg. Liability: 16. The learned counsel for the insurance company submits that as of the date of accident, the driver of the - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12400 MFA No. 100928 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 100543 of 2018 offending vehicle did not possess a valid and effective driving licence and to support his argument he has produced Ex.P11 i.e., a charge sheet, which discloses that the charge sheet is filed against the driver of the offending vehicle for the offences punishable under Sections 338, 304-A of IPC read with section 3, and 181 of the MV Act. 17. From the perusal of Ex.P11, it is clear that the driver of the offending vehicle did not possess a valid and effective driving licence as of the date of the accident. The owner has entrusted the vehicle to the person who did not possess a valid and effective driving licence. There is a breach of the policy conditions. The tribunal committed an error in fastening the liability on the Insurance company. The impugned judgment passed by the tribunal fastening the liability on the insurance company is liable to be set aside. 18. However, as of the date of the accident, the vehicle was insured with the insurance company. Even if - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12400 MFA No. 100928 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 100543 of 2018 there is a breach of policy condition, the insurance company shall indemnify the owner at the first instance and then recover the same from the owner of the offending vehicle. The Insurance Company shall indemnify and pay the compensation to the victims and thereafter recover the same from the owner in view of the proposition of law laid down by the full bench of this court in the case of NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, BIJAPUR, BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER VS. YELLAVVA AND ANOTHER, reported in ILR 2020 KAR 2239, which is aptly applicable to the case on hand. In view of the above discussion the point regarding liability is answered accordingly. Reg. quantum of compensation: 19. The deceased was about 25 years old as of the date of the accident. The accident occurred in 2013. The petitioners have not produced any proof of income to show the income of the deceased. In the absence of proof of income, the notional income must be assessed as per the schedule notified by the Karnataka State Legal Services - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12400 MFA No. 100928 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 100543 of 2018 Authority. Hence, the notional income is taken at Rs.7,000/- p.m., as the accident occurred in 2013. 20. In addition to it, 40% towards the future prospects has to be added, as per the proposition laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED VS PRANAY SETHI AND OTHERS reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680, which comes to Rs.9,800/- (7000+40%). The deceased was about 25 years old and a bachelor. Therefore, 50% of his income must be deducted towards his personal expenses, which comes to Rs.9800/2= 4,900/-. Thus, the income of the deceased is taken at Rs.4,900/-. The multiplier applicable to the age group is ‘18’. Thus, the petitioners are entitled to a compensation of Rs.10,58,400/- (Rs.4,900/-x 12 x 18) under the head loss of dependency. There are two dependants, and they are entitled to a compensation of Rs.96,000/- (Rs.48,000/- x 2) under the head loss of consortium, and Rs.36,000/- under the heads of funeral expenses and the loss of estate. - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12400 MFA No. 100928 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 100543 of 2018 21. Thus, the petitioners are entitled to a total compensation, which is as follows: Particulars Compensation amount in (Rs.) Loss of dependency (Rs.6,250/-x 12x 14) 10,58,400/- Loss of consortium (Rs.48,000/- x 3) 96,000/- Funeral expenses and loss of Estate 36,000/- Medical expenses 2,81,000/- Total 14,71,400/- Compensation awarded by the Tribunal 7,68,000/- Enhanced compensation 7,03,400/- 22. Thus, the petitioners are entitled to a total compensation of Rs.14,71,400/- as against Rs.7,68,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. Thus, the petitioners are entitled to an enhanced compensation of Rs.7,03,400/-. In view of the same, the point regarding the quantum is answered accordingly. 23. In view of the above discussion, I proceed to pass the following order: - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12400 MFA No. 100928 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 100543 of 2018 ORDER i. The appeal in MFA No. 100928/2018 filed by the insurance company is allowed. ii. The appeal in MFA No. 100543/2018 filed by the petitioners is partly allowed. iii. The judgment and award passed by the tribunal is modified. The claim petition against the insurance company is dismissed. iv. The petitioners are entitled to an enhanced compensation of ₹7,03,400/- with interest @ 6% per annum on the enhanced compensation from the date of the petition till its realisation. v. The insurance company is directed to deposit the entire compensation amount at first instance and then recover the same from the owner of the vehicle. Regarding the apportionment of the compensation, the judgment passed by the tribunal is maintained. - 15 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12400 MFA No. 100928 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 100543 of 2018 vi. The Tribunal records, and the amount in deposit, if any, shall be transmitted to the Tribunal concerned, forthwith. Sd/- (ASHOK S. KINAGI) JUDGE SKS CT:ANB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26