- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12387 MFA No. 104412 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 104412 OF 2018 (MV-I) BETWEEN: BANWARILAL S/O. NAWRANGIRAI PODDAR AGE:43 YEARS, OCC:OWNER OF TIPPER, R/O. WARD NO.5 MALLAMMA NAGAR, MUDHOL, DISTRICT BAGALKOTE PIN CODEE - 587313. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SRINIVAS B. NAIK, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MANJU S/O. KRISHNAPPA KRISHNAGOUDAR, AGE: 29 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE R/O. NAGANAPUR, TQ: MUDHOL, DISTRICT BAGALKOTE PIN CODE - 587313. 2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD REP BY BRANCH MANAGER SOMANAGOUDAR BUILDING MUDHOL PIN CODE – 587313. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.C.HUKKERI, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. R.R.MANE, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS MFA IS FILED U/SEC. 173(1) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988, PRAYING TO, CALL FOR RECORDS MVC NO.173/2015, ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC., AND MACT IX, MUDHOL AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 28.08.2018 IN MVC NO.173/2015, ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AND MACT IX, MUDHOL AS PRAYED IN THE APPEAL MEMO. MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12387 MFA No. 104412 of 2018 THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI ORAL JUDGMENT 1. This appeal is filed by the owner of the offending vehicle challenging the Judgment and award dated 28.08.2018 passed in MVC No.173/2015 by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal IX, Mudhol (for short ‘the Tribunal’). 2. Brief facts, leading rise to the filing of this appeal are as follows: On 07.07.2012, the petitioner was riding a Hero Honda CD Dawn motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-48/E-3064. Upon reaching the accident spot, a tipper lorry bearing registration No.KA-29/5269, driven by its driver, in a rash and negligent manner, dashed to the Petitioner’s motorcycle. As a result, the petitioner sustained grievous injuries and spent a huge amount towards medical and the other expenses. Hence, the petitioner filed a claim petition - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12387 MFA No. 104412 of 2018 under Section 166 of MV Act seeking compensation for the injuries sustained in a road traffic accident. Accordingly, prays to allow the claim petition. 3. The owner of the tipper filed a statement of objections, denying the averments made in the claim petition, and admitted that he was the owner of the tipper as of the date of the alleged accident. It is contended that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the rider of the motorcycle, who dashed to the tipper. It is contended that the driver of the tipper possessed a valid and effective driving license as of the date of the accident. Therefore, the Insurance Company is liable to pay the compensation. 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. It is contended that the driver of the offending vehicle did not possess a valid and effective driving license - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12387 MFA No. 104412 of 2018 as of the date of the accident. Therefore, there is a violation of the terms and conditions of the policy. 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. To substantiate his case, the petitioner examined himself as PW-1, examined the Doctor as PW-2, and marked 20 documents as Exs.P1 to Exs.P20. Conversely, the Senior Assistant of the Insurance Company was examined as RW-1, and marked 6 documents as Ex.R1 to R6. The owner of the offending vehicle neither led oral nor documentary evidence. 7. The Tribunal, after assessing the verbal and documentary evidence, allowed the claim petition in part vide judgment dated 28.08.2018 and awarded a compensation of Rs.2,32,510/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of the petition till its realization. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12387 MFA No. 104412 of 2018 8. The owner of the offending vehicle was directed to deposit the compensation amount, and the claim petition against the Insurance Company was dismissed. 9. Aggrieved by the liability fastened upon him, the owner of the vehicle, filed this instant appeal. 10. Heard the learned counsel for the owner, the petitioner, and the Insurance Company. 11. Learned counsel for the owner submits that the driver possessed a valid and effective driving license as of the date of the accident, and thus, the Tribunal committed an error in fastening the liability on the owner instead of the Insurance Company. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow the appeal. 12. Per contra, learned counsel for the Insurance Company submits that, as of the date of the accident, the owner had entrusted the vehicle to a person who did not possess a valid and effective driving license. There is a breach of policy conditions. Therefore, the Insurance - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12387 MFA No. 104412 of 2018 Company is not liable to pay the compensation as claimed by the petitioner. He submits that the Tribunal was justified in dismissing the claim petition against the Insurance Company. Hence, prays to dismiss the appeal. 13. Per contra, the learned counsel for the petitioner supported the impugned judgment. 14. Perused the records and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. 15. The point that would arise for consideration is concerning the liability. 16. There is no dispute regarding the occurrence of the accident and the injuries sustained by the petitioner in a road traffic accident. To prove the accident, the petitioner has produced a chargesheet marked as EX. P-6, which discloses that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12387 MFA No. 104412 of 2018 Regarding Liability: 17. The only issue involved in the present appeal is whether, as of the date of the accident, the driver possessed a valid and effective driving license. Admittedly, the owner was arrayed as respondent No.1 before the Tribunal. Although, the owner filed a statement of objections, he did not enter into the witness box, and even in the present appeal, he has not produced any record to show that the driver possessed a valid and effective driving license at the time of the accident. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the Insurance Company, as of the date of the accident, the driver of the offending vehicle did not have a valid and effective driving license, and the owner had entrusted the vehicle to such a person, who did not possess a valid and effective driving license. There is a breach of the policy conditions. The Tribunal was justified in dismissing the claim petition against the Insurance Company. Hence, I do not find any error in the impugned - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12387 MFA No. 104412 of 2018 Judgment. In view of the above discussion, the point regarding liability is answered accordingly. 18. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following order: ORDER (i) The appeal is dismissed. (ii) The Judgment and award dated 28.08.2018 passed in MVC No.173/2015 by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge and JMFC and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal IX, Mudhol, is hereby confirmed. (iii) The amount in deposit, if any, and the trial Court records be transmitted to the Tribunal, forthwith. Sd/- (ASHOK S. KINAGI) JUDGE RHR/- CT:ANB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 32