- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38930 MFA No. 2236 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 2236 OF 2021 (MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. MUNIRATHNAMMA W/O LATE H M SRIKANTAIAH HINDU AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS R/O CHIKKAHEJJAJI DODDABELAVANGALA HOBLI DODDABALLAPUR TALUK 2. SRI SHIVANANDA S/O LATE H M SRIKANTAIAH AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS R/O CHIKKAHEJJAJI DODDABELAVANGALA HOBLI DODDABALLAPUR TALUK 3. SRI VARUN KUMAR S/O LATE H M SRIKANTAIAH AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS R/O CHIKKAHEJJAJI DODDABELAVANGALA HOBLI DODDABALLAPUR TALUK …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. AJAY R., ADVOCATE FOR SRI.LAKSHMIKANTH G., & TEJAS REDDY, ADVOCATES) Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38930 MFA No. 2236 of 2021 AND: 1. SRI ASHWATHNARAYANA S/O LATE HANUMAIAH HINDU, MAJOR R/O GANNAKALLU VILLAGE THAVAREKERE HOBLI BENGALURU SOUTH 2. SRI GANGARAJU S/O HONNAIAH HINDU, MAJOR R/O KOTE BEEDI THYAMAGONDLU HOBLI NELAMANGALA TALUK 3. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD 41/2A, 2B, 1ST FLOOR NITHYANANDA NAGAR NAYANDAHALLI, MYSORE ROAD BENGALURU-560 039 REPTD BY ITS MANAGER …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. GIRISH KUMAR C.S., ADVOCATE) THIS MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:31.12.2020, PASSED IN MVC NO.671/2015, ON THE FILE OF THE IV-ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND MEMBER, MACT, DODDABALLAPUR, DISMISSING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38930 MFA No. 2236 of 2021 THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL JUDGMENT Aggrieved by the dismissal of MVC.No.671/2015 dated 31.12.2020 by the IV Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Member of MACT, Doddaballapura, the claimants are before this Court. 2. The claim petition was filed seeking compensation of an amount of Rs.10,00,000/- for the death of the deceased in a road traffic accident. It is the case of the claimants that on 15.06.2008 at about 10.00 pm., when the deceased was proceeding on his Hero Honda Motorcycle on Dabaspet- Doddaballapura road, the driver of the tractor-trailer had parked the vehicle negligently without putting indicator. The deceased, who was riding slowly and cautiously, had not noticed the parked vehicle in the dark and dashed against the rear side of the tractor. Due to the impact, the deceased had sustained grievous injuries on his head, face, chest, upper arm and other parts of the body and later, he succumbed to the injuries. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38930 MFA No. 2236 of 2021 3. The Tribunal while dismissing the petition had observed that though it is the case of the claimants that tractor-trailer was parked negligently by its driver and accident had not occurred due to the negligence of the deceased, they have not challenged the FIR or the charge sheet filed. The charge sheet is filed against the deceased. When the deceased himself is a tortfeasor, he is not entitled for any compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1989 and accordingly, the Tribunal had dismissed the claim petition. 4. When this matter came up on 01.09.2025 and 17.09.2025, there was no representation on behalf of the appellants. Hence, it was listed under the caption for “dismissal” and today also when this matter came up there is no representation on behalf of the appellants. Hence, this Court is inclined to pass orders based on the material available on record. 5. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3/ Insurance Company submits that the Tribunal had rightly dismissed the claim petition and there are no grounds to interfere with the same. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38930 MFA No. 2236 of 2021 6. This Court had perused the order and the reasoning given by the Tribunal considering the charge sheet that is filed against the deceased. As the deceased being a tortfeasor cannot maintain a petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1989 seeking compensation. Hence, this Court finds no reasons to interfere with the well considered order passed by the Tribunal. 7. Accordingly, the appeal of the claimants is dismissed. i. No costs. ii. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE BN List No.: 3 Sl No.: 1