- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27850 MFA No. 4814 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.4814 OF 2017 (MV-I) BETWEEN: MR. MOHAMMED SALIM ANSARI S/O.MOHAMMED NASIM ANSARI, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, #123, NANDIDURGA ROAD, NEELADRI MAHA, BANGALORE-560046. …APPELLANT (BY MISS. SHAHIDA KHANAM J., A/W SRI MASKOOR HASHMI M.D., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MR. NAZEER AHMED S/O.ABDUL REHAMAN, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/AT #388, 5TH CROSS, VINOBHA NAGAR, K.G. HALLI, BANGALORE-560048. 2. BAJAJ ALLIANZ INSURANCE CO. LTD., STAR BAZAAR, DR. RAJKUMAR ROAD, 4TH ‘M’ BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR, BANGALORE-560010. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI K.V. NAIK, ADVOCATE FOR SRI MUNIYAPPA D., ADVOCATE FOR R-1; SRI VIJAYA PHANEENDRA T.B., ADVOCATE FOR SRI A.N. KRISHNA SWAMY, ADVOCATE FOR R-2) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 20.03.2017 PASSED IN MVC NO.4877/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE 5TH ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE & 24TH ACMM, MEMBER, MACT, BENGALURU, BHARATHI H M Digitally signed by BHARATHI H M Location: HIGHCOURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DHARWAD - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27850 MFA No. 4814 of 2017 AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.3,20,000/- WITH INTEREST AT 9% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ITS REALIZATION. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FURTHER SUBMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA ORAL JUDGMENT The present appeal is filed under Section 173 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 19881 by the owner challenging the judgment and award dated 20.03.2017 passed in MVC No.4877/2014 by the V Additional Small Causes Judge and XXIV ACMM, Member, MACT, Bengaluru2. 2. The Tribunal, while partly allowing the claim petition and awarding a total compensation of `3,20,000/- with interest at 9% (excluding future medical expenses), has exonerated the insurer (respondent No.2 before the Tribunal) from payment of liability and fastened the liability on the owner (respondent No.1 before the Tribunal) to pay the compensation awarded, together with accrued interest. 1 Hereinafter referred to as ‘Act’ 2 Hereinafter referred to as ‘Tribunal’ - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27850 MFA No. 4814 of 2017 3. Learned counsel Smt. Shashida Khana M.J. appearing for learned counsel Sri Maskoor Hashmi M.D. for the appellant-owner contends that the finding of the Tribunal that the owner of the vehicle is liable to pay the compensation awarded since the driving licence of the owner had expired on 14.08.2014 and renewed on 29.11.2014, while the accident took place on 05.10.2014, is erroneous. It is contended that although the driving licence of the driver expired on 14.08.2014, the owner had once again applied for a licence and paid the requisite fees on 29.09.2014 and hence, having regard to the first proviso contained in Section 15 (1) of the Act, the insurer is liable to pay the compensation. Reliance is further placed on the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Nagappa @ Nagaraja and others Vs. Ravi Kupaluru and others3 in support of the contention that since the owner of the vehicle admittedly possessed the driving licence, even though the same had expired 3 MFA No.103680/2015 c/w MFA No.103681/2015 D.D. 08.02.2019 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27850 MFA No. 4814 of 2017 before the date of accident, the insurer is liable to pay the compensation awarded. Hence, she seeks for allowing the appeal and granting the reliefs sought for. 4. Learned counsel Sri K.V. Naik for learned counsel Sri Muniyappa .D for respondent No.1-claimant supports the contention regarding the liability as put forth by the owner of the vehicle. 5. Learned counsel Sri Vijaya Phaneendra T.B. for learned counsel Sri A.N. Krishna Swamy for respondent No.2-insurer justifies the findings recorded by the Tribunal. However, the legal position as held in the case of Nagappa3 is not disputed. 6. The submissions of the learned counsels have been considered and the material on record, including the records of the Tribunal, have been perused. The question that arises for consideration is: - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27850 MFA No. 4814 of 2017 “Whether the Tribunal was justified in exonerating the insurer from payment of compensation and fastening the liability on the owner of the vehicle?” 7. The Tribunal has recorded a finding that the driving licence of the owner expired on 14.08.2014 and was renewed on 29.11.2014. 8. It is forthcoming from Ex.R.12 that the validity of the driving licence of respondent No.1-owner to drive light motor vehicle (private) was between 15.10.2004 and 14.09.2014. It is further evident from the extract of the learner’s licence (Ex.R.7) that the owner paid the requisite fee for issuance of licence on 29.09.2014 and that learner’s licence was issued on 16.10.2014. It is contended on behalf of the owner that since the owner shifted his place of residence from one State to another, he was instructed to apply for a licence afresh rather than seek for renewal of licence. 9. A Division Bench of this Court in the case of Nagappa3, after considering various judgments of the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27850 MFA No. 4814 of 2017 Hon'ble Supreme Court, considering a fact situation wherein the licence of the driver of the insured vehicle had expired before the date of occurrence of the accident, recorded a finding that, having regard to the fact that the driver had possessed a driving license, he was not disqualified from driving the insured vehicle and hence, fastened the liability to pay the compensation awarded on the insurer. 10. Further, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Shaanabasappa Vs. Anand and others4 relied upon by the learned counsel for the appellant, noticing a fact and situation wherein the driving licence of the driver expired on 20.01.2018, and that he had made an application for renewal on 06.09.2018 by paying the requisite fee together with the requisite application form and the scrutiny of the said application was made on 04.02.2019 consequent to which the endorsement of the driving licence was made on 16.02.2019 and the printed 4 MFA No.100211/2021 D.D. 13.04.2022 - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27850 MFA No. 4814 of 2017 driving licence was issued on 18.02.2019, has recorded a finding that the time consumed by the licencing authority for scrutiny of the application ought not to be held against the licence holder. 11. Reliance is also placed by the learned counsel for the appellant on the first proviso to Section 15 (1), where under it is stipulated that if an application for renewal of a licence was made within 30 days from the expiry of such licence, the renewal would take effect from the date of expiry. It is also pertinent to note that the said period of 30 days has been increased to one year by Act No.32 of 2019 with effect from 01.09.2019. 12. In view of the settled proposition of law as held by the Division Bench of this Court in Nagappa3, as also the judgment of the Co-Ordinate Bench of this Court in Shaanabasappa4 as noticed above, as well as the stipulation contained in the first proviso to Section 15(1) of the Act, the finding of the Tribunal holding that the - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27850 MFA No. 4814 of 2017 driver of the vehicle did not possess an effective driving licence as on the date of the accident and exonerating the insurer from payment of compensation is erroneous. Accordingly, it is required to be held that the insurer is liable to pay the compensation awarded together with accrued interest. Hence, the question framed for consideration is answered in the negative. 13. Learned counsel for respondent No.1-claimant submits that no enhancement of compensation has been sought and that the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper. 14. Hence, the following: ORDER i. The above appeal is allowed; ii. The judgment and award dated 20.03.2017 passed in MVC No.4877/2014 by the V Additional Small Causes Judge and XXIV ACMM, Member, MACT, Bengaluru is modified to the extent of holding that the compensation together with - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27850 MFA No. 4814 of 2017 accrued interest awarded by the Tribunal shall be deposited by the insurer (respondent No.2 herein/ respondent No.2 before the Tribunal). In all other respects, the judgment and award of the Tribunal remains unaltered; iii. The amount deposited by the appellant be digitally refunded to the appellant; iv. The Registry to draw the modified award accordingly; v. Records of the Tribunal be transmitted to the Tribunal forthwith. No costs. Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE MBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29