- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38182 MFA No. 9443 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 2816 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 9443 OF 2013 (MV-I) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 2816 OF 2025 (MV-I) IN MFA No. 9443/2013: BETWEEN: UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED REGIONAL OFFIICE, 5TH & 6TH FLOORS, KRISHI BHAVAN, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, HUDSON CIRCLE, BANGALROE 560001 REP. BY ITS MANAGER SMT. P. NAVAMANY …APPELLANT (BY SRI. KRISHNA KISHORE S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI SAGAYRAJ S/O KANNAN, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/AT NO. 343, 11TH CROSS, M V GARDEN, ULSOOR, BANGALORE - 08. PERMANENT ADDRESS NO 1291 A RAMAKRISHNA HEGDE NAGAR BANGALORE- 560097. 2. SRI M.R. RENUKA MAJOR, S/O LATE RAJSHEKARAIAH, Digitally signed by PADMASHREE SHEKHAR DESAI Location: High Court Of Karnatka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38182 MFA No. 9443 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 2816 of 2025 NO. 303, G.K TEMPLE STREET, BSAVANAHALLI, CHICKMAGALUR DISTRICT- 577101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAGHU R, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. K.V. NAIK, ADVOCATE FOR R1; V/O DTD 27.01.2020 APPEAL AGAINST R2 DISMISSED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 11.03.2013 PASSED IN MVC NO.6384/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE IX ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE & XXXIV ACMM, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MEMBER, MACT-7, BANGALORE, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.5,15,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% P.A ON RS.5,05,000/- FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL PAYMENT. IN MFA NO. 2816/2025: BETWEEN: SRI. SAGAYRAJ, S/O KANNAN AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/AT NO. 343, 11TH CROSS, MV GARDEN, ULSOOR, BENGALURU-560008. PERMANENT ADDRESS: NO.1291 A, RAMAKRISHNA HEGDE NAGAR, BENGALURU. ...APPELLANT (BY SRI. RAGHU R, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. K.V.NAIK, ADVOCATE) - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38182 MFA No. 9443 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 2816 of 2025 AND: 1. SRI M R RENUKA MAJOR, R/AT NO.303, G.K. TEMPLE STREET, BASAVANHALLI, CHIKMAGALUR DISTRICT, CHICKMAGALUR. 2. THE MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, KRUSHI BHAVAN, NEAR CORPORATION CIRCLE, BENGALURU-560002. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. KRISHNA KISHORE S, ADVOCATE FOR R2; V/O DTD 03.09.2025 NOTICE TO R1 D/W) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.11.03.2013 PASSED IN MVC NO.6384/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE IX ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND XXXIV ACMM, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MEMBER, MACT-7, BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38182 MFA No. 9443 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 2816 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA ORAL JUDGMENT Heard the arguments of the learned counsel on both side. 2. M.F.A.No.9443 of 2013 is filed by the Insurance Company seeking to modify the finding of the Tribunal in Judgment dated 11.03.2013 in M.V.C.No.6384 of 2011 passed by the IX Additional Small Causes Judge & XXXIV ACMM, Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru that the insured/second respondent was driving the vehicle at the time of accident and set aside the order dated 11.07.2013 made in Review Petition No.13 of 2013 mulcting liability against the appellant. 3. The petition in M.V.C.No. 6384 of 2011 filed by the petitioner/claimant was partly allowed and Respondent No.1/owner of the vehicle was directed to pay total compensation of Rs.5,15,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum on Rs.5,05,000/- (excluding medical future medical expenses of Rs.10,000/-) from the date of petition - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38182 MFA No. 9443 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 2816 of 2025 till total payment, to the petitioner. Respondent No.1 was directed to deposit the amount within 30 days from the date of the said order. 4. Later, the owner of the vehicle filed Review Petition in R.P.No.13 of 2013 wherein the petition filed under Section 114 of CPC for review of the judgment and award passed in M.V.C.No.6384 of 2011 was allowed and the Tribunal ordered that the driver of the offending vehicle was having effective driving license to drive the said class of the vehicle as on the date of the accident and there is no violation of any terms of the policy by Respondent No.1 and therefore, Respondent Nos.1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the petitioner and Respondent No.2/Insurance Company shall indemnify Respondent No.1 and shall deposit the compensation before the Tribunal, within 30 days from the date of the said order. 5. Aggrieved by the order passed in R.P.No.13 of 2013, the appellant/Insurance Company has preferred - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38182 MFA No. 9443 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 2816 of 2025 M.F.A.No.9443 of 2013. It is the case of the Insurance Company that the first respondent herein filed claim petition seeking compensation for the injuries suffered by him in alleged road traffic accident dated 28.08.2011 while riding motor cycle near Nagavara Junction, Bengaluru and said to have been hit by lorry bearing registration No.KA- 18-A-1348. The said lorry belongs to the second respondent/owner and insured with the appellant. The Basansawadi Traffic Police had received a complaint from the injured on the same day and registered the same as Crime No.109 of 2011. In the said complaint, the injured categorically stated that the driver of the lorry was under the influence of alcohol and he had no driving license. Considering the same, the Tribunal had rightly exonerated the appellant/Insurance Company from liability to indemnify the owner of the vehicle who is second respondent herein. Later, in the review petition, it was held the driver of the offending vehicle was having effective driving license and there is no violation of any - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38182 MFA No. 9443 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 2816 of 2025 terms on the part of the owner of the offending vehicle and Insurance Company is liable to pay compensation. 6. The learned counsel for the appellant/Insurance Company argued that the driving license pertains to the owner of the vehicle but not pertinent to the driver of the offending vehicle and moreover, the owner of the vehicle cannot file review before the Tribunal seeking to review the judgment passed by the Tribunal on the ground that he is possessing valid and effective driving license to drive the insured lorry. The Tribunal, without noticing the fact allowed the review petition and fastened the liability against the Insurance Company. 7. Admittedly, the filing of review petition is not maintainable. Therefore, the order dated 11.07.2013 passed by the Tribunal in Review Petition No.13 of 2013 is erroneous. Moreover, the driving license does not pertain to the driver of the offending vehicle and it pertains to the owner of the vehicle and the finding of the Tribunal on this aspect, is erroneous to fasten liability against the - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38182 MFA No. 9443 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 2816 of 2025 Insurance Company in the review petition and the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal in M.V.C.No.6384 of 2011 holds good. Hence, I pass the following: ORDER i) M.F.A.No.9443 of 2013 is allowed. ii) The judgment and award dated 11.03.2013 passed in M.V.C.No.6384 of 2011 by the IX Additional Small Causes Judge & XXXIV ACMM, Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru is confirmed. iii) The order dated 11.07.2013 in R.P.No.13 of 2013 passed by the IX Additional Small Causes Judge & XXXIV ACMM, Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru is hereby set aside. 8. M.F.A.No.2816 of 2025 is filed by the claimant seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded in M.V.C.No.6384 of 2011 vide order dated 11.03.2013 by - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38182 MFA No. 9443 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 2816 of 2025 the IX Additional Small Causes Judge & XXXIV ACMM, Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru. 9. On perusal of the entire materials available on record, this Court finds that the Tribunal has appreciated the facts, evidence and documents furnished by the claimant has rightly arrived at a conclusion and awarded total compensation of Rs.5,15,000/-. This Court finds no reason to interfere with the same. Hence, M.F.A.No.2816 of 2025 is dismissed and the judgment and award dated 11.03.2013 passed in M.V.C.No.6384 of 2011 by the IX Additional Small Causes Judge & XXXIV ACMM, Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru is confirmed 10. The Tribunal has directed Respondent No.1/ Owner to pay total compensation of Rs.5,15,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till total payment, to the petitioner. Respondent No.1/Owner was directed to deposit the amount within 30 days from the date of the said order. On such deposit, the claimant is permitted to withdraw the same. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38182 MFA No. 9443 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 2816 of 2025 If any excess amount is deposited by the Insurance Company before this Court, it is permitted to withdraw the same. Sd/- (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE DH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29