- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11084 MFA No. 23040 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 21144 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 23040 OF 2013 (MV-I) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 21144 OF 2012 IN MFA NO.23040/2013: BETWEEN: UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, DIVISIONAL OFFICE, AT MARUTI GALLI, BELAGAVI, BY ITS SENIOR DIVISIONAL MANAGER, S.M. DHARMANAND RAO. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. N R KUPPELUR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MALLINATH BHUJAGONDA PATIL AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST (NOW NIL), R/O: DANAWAD, TALUK: SHIROL, DIST: KOLHAPUR. 2. SHRI MEHABOOB SHAMSUDDIN PATHAN, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCC: MASON, R/O: VITA KAHANAPUR, TALUK: KHANAPUR, DIST: SANGALI, (RIDER OF MOTOR CYCLE BEARING NO.MH-10/L-3126) MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Date: 2025.09.09 12:02:02 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11084 MFA No. 23040 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 21144 of 2012 3. SHRI LAXMAN DATTA JADHAV AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: AT POST: PALASHI, TALUK: KHANAPUR, DIST: SANGALI, (OWNER OF MOTOR CYCYLE BEARING, NO.MH-10/L-3126) …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SUNANDA P. PATIL. ADVOCATE FOR R1; NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH; R3-SERVICE HELD SUFFICIENT) THIS MFA IS FILED U/SEC.173(1) OF MV ACT, 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DTD:25-01-2012 PASSED IN MVC.NO.733/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE PRESIDING OFFICER, FAST TRACK COURT AND MEMBER, MACT, HUKKERI, AWARDING THE COMPENSATION OF RS.1,70,380/- WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 6% P.A., FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALISATION. IN MFA NO.21144/2013: BETWEEN: THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD , DIVISIONAL OFFICE, MARUTHI GALLI, BELAGAVI. REPTED. BY ITS SENIOR DIVISIONAL MANAGER. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. N.R. KUPPELUR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. ASHWINI W/O. SANJAY @ SANJU PATIL , AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, 2. KUM. SAMARTH SANJAY @ SANJU PATIL, AGE: 5 YEARS, SINCE MINOR, REPTED. BY HIS NEXT FRIEND MOTHER/ RESPONDENT NO.1. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11084 MFA No. 23040 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 21144 of 2012 3. SMT. PARUBAI PANDITGOUDA PATIL AGE: 57 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, 4. SRI. PANDITGOUDA RAMANAGOUDA PATIL AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC. NIL, ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF DANAWAD VILLAGE, TQ. SHIROL, DIST. KOLHAPUR. 5. SHRI MALLINATH BHUJAGOUDA PATIL AGE: 34 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. DANAWAD VILLAGE, TQ: SHIROL, DIST: KOLHAPUR. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHIVARAJ S. BALLOLI, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R4; SRI. MRUTYJUNJAYA TATA BANGI, ADVOCATE FOR R5) THIS MFA IS FILED U/SEC.173(1) OF M.V. ACT 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:23.09.2011, PASSED IN M.V.C. NO.471/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE PRESIDING OFFICER, FAST TRACK COURT-III & ADDITIONAL M.A.C.T., BELAGAVI, AWARDING THE COMPENSATION OF RS.5,38,000/- WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 8% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ITS REALIZATION. THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11084 MFA No. 23040 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 21144 of 2012 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI) These Miscellaneous First Appeals are filed under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ‘M.V.Act’ for short) by the appellant- Insurance Company. MFA No.21144/2012 is filed challenging the judgment and awards dated 23.09.2011 passed in MVC No.471/2010 by the Fast Track Court-III & Additional MACT, Belagavi, and MFA No.23040/2013 is filed challenging the judgment and award dated 25.01.2012 passed in MVC No.733/2010 by the Fast Track Court and MACT, Hukkeri. 2. For convenience, the parties are referred based on their ranking before the Tribunal. 3. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of MFA No.23040/2013, are as follows: 4. The petitioner and the deceased Sanjay @ Sanju Patil were proceeding on a motorcycle bearing Reg.No.MH- - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11084 MFA No. 23040 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 21144 of 2012 09/AU-2475. The deceased Sanjay was riding the motorcycle, and the petitioner in MVC No.733/2010 was the pillion rider. The deceased Sanjay was riding the motorcycle in a moderate speed by observing all the traffic rules. When they came within the limits of Yadagaud at Ammanagi Cross, on Hukkeri-Chikkodi road, at that time, the rider of the motorcycle bearing Reg.No.MH-10/L-3126 came from the opposite direction, and collided with the motorcycle of the petitioner. As a result, Sanjay sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the injuries, and the petitioner sustained grievous injuries. Hence, the petitioner filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the M.V.Act seeking compensation. 5. Notices were issued to the owner and the rider of the offending motorcycle. The owner remained absent and placed ex-parte. The petitioner has given up the claim against the owner of the offending motorcycle. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11084 MFA No. 23040 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 21144 of 2012 6. The Insurance Company filed a statement of objections denying the averments made in the claim petition. It is contended that the petition filed by the petitioner is not maintainable for non-joinder of necessary party. It is contended that there is a collusion of two vehicles and the petitioner has not made the insurer of the motorcycle bearing Reg.No.MH-10/L-3126 as party to the claim petition. Further it is contended that the rider of the motorcycle bearing Reg.No.MH-09/AU-2475 was not holding a valid and effective driving license as of the date of the accident. Hence, prays to dismiss the claim petition against the Insurance Company. 7. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of MFA No.21144/2012, are as follows: 8. The deceased Sanjay @ Sanju Patil along with another person were proceeding on the motorcycle bearing Reg.No.MH-09/AU-2475. The deceased Sanjay was riding the motorcycle in a moderate speed by observing all the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11084 MFA No. 23040 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 21144 of 2012 traffic rules. When they came within the limits of Yadagaud at Ammanagi Cross, on Hukkeri-Chikkodi road, at that time, the rider of the motorcycle bearing Reg.No.MH-10/L-3126 came from opposite direction, and collided with the motorcycle of the petitioner. As a result, Sanjay sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the injuries, and the pillion rider sustained grievous injuries. Hence, the petitioners, who are the legal heirs of the deceased, filed a claim petition under Section 163-A of the M.V.Act, seeking compensation. 9. Respondent No.1-owner of the motorcycle bearing Reg.No.MH-09/AU-2475 filed a statement of objections denying the averments made in the claim petition. The owner admits the occurrence of the accident, and he is the owner of the motorcycle, and it is insured with respondent No.2-Insurance Company. It is contended that the deceased possessed a valid and effective driving license as of the date of the road traffic accident. Hence, prays to dismiss the claim petition against respondent No.1-owner. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11084 MFA No. 23040 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 21144 of 2012 10. The Insurance Company filed a statement of objections denying the averments made in the claim petition. It is contended that the petition filed by the petitioners is not maintainable for non-joinder of necessary party. It is contended that there is a collusion of two vehicles and the petitioner has not made the insurer of the motorcycle bearing Reg.No.MH-10/L-3126 as party to the claim petition. Further it is contended that the rider of the motorcycle bearing Reg.No.MH-09/AU-2475 was not holding a valid and effective driving license as of the date of the accident. Hence, prays to dismiss the claim petition against the Insurance Company. 11. The Tribunal, on the basis of the pleadings of the parties in MVC No.733/2010, and in MVC No.471/2010, framed the relevant issues. 12. The petitioner in MVC No.733/2010 was examined as P.W.1, and also examined the doctor as P.W.2, and marked 22 documents as Exs.P1 to P22. In rebuttal, - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11084 MFA No. 23040 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 21144 of 2012 the Insurance Company did not lead any evidence, but marked insurance policy as Ex.R1. 13. In MVC No.471/2010, petitioner No.1 was examined as P.W.1, and marked 10 documents as Exs.P1 to P19. In rebuttal, the respondents have not led any evidence. 14. The Tribunal, after assessing the oral and documentary evidence awarded the compensation of Rs.1,70,380/- with interest at the rate of 6% in MVC No.733/2010, and Rs.5,38,000/- with interest at the rate of 8% in MVC No. 471/2010. The owner of the motorcycle bearing Reg.No.MH-10/L-3126 and the Insurance Company of the motorcycle bearing Reg.No.MH-09/AU-2475 were jointly and severally held liable to pay the compensation to the petitioners in MVC No.733/2010, and the owner and the Insurance Company of the motorcycle bearing Reg.No.MH- 09/AU-2475 were jointly and severally held liable to pay the compensation to the petitioners in MVC No. 471/2010. The - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11084 MFA No. 23040 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 21144 of 2012 Tribunal directed the Insurance Company to deposit the compensation amount with accrued interest. 15. The Insurance Company, aggrieved by the judgment and award passed in MVC No.733/2010 preferred an appeal in MFA No.23040/2013 and aggrieved by the judgment and award passed in MVC No.471/2010, preferred an appeal in MFA No.21144/2012, challenging the liability. 16. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the Insurance Company, and the learned counsel for the petitioners and clubbed the appeals to avoid the repetition of facts. 17. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company submits that the accident occurred due to the collusion of two vehicles. He submits that the claim petition filed by the petitioners is not maintainable for non-joinders of necessary party. He also submits that the deceased Sanju was riding the motorcycle in a rash and negligent manner as of the date of the accident. To buttress his arguments, he placed - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11084 MFA No. 23040 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 21144 of 2012 reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of RAMKHILADI & ANOTHER VS THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY AND ANOTHER in CIVIL APPEAL NO.9393/2019 disposed of on 07.01.2020. He also submits that the Tribunal instead of deducting 1/3rd of income towards personal expenses, in MVC No.471/2010, has deducted 1/4th. Hence, on these grounds, he pays to allow the appeals. 18. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that deceased Sanju was riding the motorcycle bearing Reg.No.MH-09/AU-2475, and the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent riding of the motorcycle bearing Reg.No.MH-10/L-3126, and charge sheet is filed against the rider of the motorcycle bearing Reg.No.MH-10/L-3126, and no abatement charge sheet was filed against the deceased Sanju. He submits that the claim petition filed under Section 163-A of the M.V.Act is maintainable. To buttress his arguments, he placed reliance on the Full Bench judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CHANDRAKANTA - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11084 MFA No. 23040 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 21144 of 2012 TIWARI VS NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED AND ANOTHER reported in (2020) 7 SCC 386. He also submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper, and do not call for any interference by this court. 19. Perused the records and considered the submission of the learned counsel for the parties. The points that arise for consideration are regarding the liability and the quantum of compensation. In MFA No.21144/2012. 20. There is no dispute that Mallinath and Sanju were proceeding on the motorcycle bearing Reg.No.MH- 09/AU-2475 on 01.08.2009, and the rider of the motorcycle bearing Reg.No.MH-10/L-3126 was riding the motorcycle in a rash and negligent manner and collided with the motorcycle bearing Reg.No.MH-09/AU-2475. Criminal case was registered against the rider of the motorcycle bearing Reg.No.MH-10/L-3126 for the offences punishable under Sections 279, 337 & 338 of IPC and Sections 134 and 187 - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11084 MFA No. 23040 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 21144 of 2012 of M.V.Act. Admittedly, no charge sheet is filed against the deceased Sanju. From the perusal of the charge sheet produced by the petitioners, it discloses that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent riding of the motorcycle bearing Reg.No.MH-10/L-3126. The deceased Sanju has not contributed for the cause of the accident, it is only the rider of the motorcycle bearing Reg.No.MH-10/L- 3126. The Tribunal was justified in recording its finding that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent riding of the rider of the motorcycle bearing Reg.No.MH-10/L- 3126. 21. Insofar as maintainability of the claim petition in MVC No.471/2010, the learned counsel for the Insurance Company submits that the deceased Sanju was riding the motorcycle, and the accident caused due to his own negligence, the petitioners cannot maintain the claim petition under Section 163-A of the M.V.Act. Admittedly, the charge sheet is filed against the rider of the motorcycle bearing Reg.No.MH-10/L-3126. The Hon’ble Apex Court in - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11084 MFA No. 23040 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 21144 of 2012 the case of CHANDRAKANTA TIWARI (SUPRA), held as follows: “A perusal of this provision would show that Shri Sahoo is correct in stating that the claimant need not plead or establish that the death in respect of which the claim was made, was due to any negligence or default of the owner of the vehicle or of any other person. In that view of the matter, it is not relevant that the person insured must be the driver of the vehicle but may well have been riding with somebody else driving a vehicle which resulted in the death of the person driving the vehicle. The High Court, therefore, is clearly wrong in stating that it was necessary under Section 163-A to prove that somebody else was driving the vehicle rashly and negligently, as a result of which, the death of the victim would take place.” 22. Considering the proposition laid down by the Full Bench of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CHANDRAKANTA TIWARI (SUPRA), and the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the Insurance Company does not hold water. Considering the proposition laid down by the Full Bench of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CHANDRAKANTA TIWARI (SUPRA), the Tribunal was - 15 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11084 MFA No. 23040 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 21144 of 2012 justified in recording its finding that the claim petition filed by the petitioners under Section 163-A of the M.V.Act is maintainable. 23. Insofar as quantum of compensation in MVC No.471/2010, though the petitioners have not produced any income proof of the deceased, the Tribunal has taken the income at Rs.3,250/-. Since there are four petitioners, the Tribunal ought to have deducted 1/3rd instead of 1/4th. Out of Rs.40,000/-, if 1/3rd is deducted, which comes to Rs.26,667/. The deceased was about 36 years old, the multiplier applicable to his age group is ‘15’, as the accident occurred in 2010. Thus, the petitioners are entitled for compensation of Rs.4,00,005/- (Rs.26,667/- x 15) under the head loss of dependency. Rs.10,000/-towards consortium, Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses, Rs.5,000/- towards loss of estate. Thus, the petitioners are entitled for total compensation of Rs.4,20,005/- as against Rs.5,38,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. The petitioners are entitled for total compensation Rs.4,20,005/-. The - 16 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11084 MFA No. 23040 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 21144 of 2012 compensation awarded by the Tribunal is reduced to Rs.4,20,005/- In MFA No.23040/2013. 24. There are no tenable grounds made by the Insurance Company, regarding the appeal in MFA No.23040/2013. I do not find any error in the compensation awarded by the Tribunal in MVC No.733/2010. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i) MFA No.23040/2013 is dismissed. ii) MFA No.21144/2012 is allowed in part. iii) The judgment and award dated 23.09.2011 passed in MVC No.471/2010 by the Fast Track Court-III & Additional MACT, Belagavi is modified. - 17 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11084 MFA No. 23040 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 21144 of 2012 iv) The petitioners are entitled for total compensation of Rs.4,20,005/- as against Rs.5,38,000/- awarded by the Tribunal with interest at the rate of 8% p.a. from the date of the petition till realisation of the amount. v) The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the compensation amount with accrued interest. vi) The amount in deposit, if any, and the records, if any be transmitted to the Tribunal concerned forthwith. Sd/- (ASHOK S. KINAGI) JUDGE MBS CT: PA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4