- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51211 MFA No. 385 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 385 OF 2020 (MV-I) BETWEEN: THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., MAXIMUS COMMERCIAL COMPLEX LIGHT HOUSE HILL ROAD, MANGALORE REP. BY THE REGIONAL MANAGER RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, CENTENARY BUILDING MG ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. D VIJAYAKUMAR., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI SHEKAR BELCHADA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, S/O LATE AITA BELCHADA R/O "NANASU" AMBEDKARNAGAR 2ND CROSS, MADWANAGAR KODAVOOR VILLAGE, UUDPI TALUK & DISTRICT-576 101. 2. SRI SUDHAKAR K KALMADI S/O KRISHNAPPA KALMADI H NO.26/59 B-1 AMBA KALMADE MALPE ROAD, KODAVOOR VILLAGE, UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT - 576 101. …RESPONDENTS (VIDE ORDER DATED 17.11.2025 R1 IS ABATED; R2 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) Digitally signed by ANNAPURNA G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51211 MFA No. 385 of 2020 THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 11.09.2019, PASSED IN MVC NO. 507/2018, ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADITIONAL MACT, UDUPI, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.2,29,654/- WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 6 PERCENT P.A., FROM THE DATE OF THE PETITION TILL FULL AND FINAL REALIZATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the insurer challenging the judgment and award dated 11.09.2019 passed by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and Principal Senior Civil Judge, Udupi (for short `Tribunal'), in MVC No.507/2018. 2. Though this appeal is slated for admission, with consent of learned advocates appearing for both the sides, the matter is taken up for final disposal. 3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Tribunal. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51211 MFA No. 385 of 2020 4. The brief facts of the case are that, on 28.06.2017 at about 10.00 a.m., the petitioner was traveling in a bus bearing registration NO.KA-25C-05 from Madwanagar towards Udupi. He met with an accident due to rash and negligent driving of the said bus by its driver. As a result, he sustained grievous injuries and suffered permanent disability. With these reasons, he prayed to award compensation. 5. The respondent No.1 was the owner and respondent No.2 was the insurer of the offending motorcycle. Respondent No.1 remained ex parte before the Tribunal. Respondent No.2 filed its written statement denying the contentions of the claim petitioner and also denied its liability to pay the compensation due to breach of terms and conditions of the policy of insurance. With these reasons, it prayed to dismiss the claim petition. 6. From the rival contentions of the parties, the Tribunal framed necessary issues. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51211 MFA No. 385 of 2020 7. The claimant to prove his case, examined two witnesses as PW-1 and PW-2 and marked 16 documents, as per Exs.P-1 to P-16. The respondent-Insurance Company has examined two witnesses and marked Exs.R- 1 to R-3. 8. The Tribunal after hearing both parties and appreciating the evidence on record, by the impugned judgment, awarded the following amount of compensation: Particulars Amount in Rs. Pain and suffering 40,000 Medical expenses 69,614 Loss of future income 68,040 Conveyance, food, nourishment, attendant charges 5,000 Loss of amenities in life 20,000 Loss of income during laid up period 27,000 Total Rs.2,29,654/- 9. The insurer seriously challenged its liability to pay the compensation on the ground that there is violation of terms and conditions of policy of insurance that is, not holding a valid and effective driving license and also not - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51211 MFA No. 385 of 2020 having permit to ply the said bus on the route where the accident occurred. The Tribunal considering the evidence of RW-2 and the documents placed on record held that the driver of the offending vehicle had licence to drive the said class of vehicle. The said point is also not disputed by the appellant in the present appeal. The appellant has contended before the Tribunal that he had no valid permit to drive the said vehicle on the said route. Since respondent-owner remained exparte before the Tribunal, he has not produced the required permit to show that he was plying the bus as per the permit given by the concerned RTO. The trial court records reveal that the RTO was examined to substantiate the contention of respondent No. 2, and in his evidence, RW-2 stated that according to their records, the offending vehicle did not have a permit to ply on the said route. The said evidence of RW-2 is not disputed by anybody including the claimant. Under such facts and circumstances, the Court has - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51211 MFA No. 385 of 2020 accepted that the said vehicle had no valid permit to ply on the said route as on the date of the accident. 10. Learned counsel for the appellant relied on the judgment of this Court in the case of Syed Zaheer vs. Smt.Puttamadamma and ors., in MFA.No.5745/2016 C/w 4811/2016 dated 07.12.2023. In the said case there was also a violations of policy i.e. the driver was not having a valid license and the offending vehicle had no permit. Considering the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court, the Division Bench of this Court held that in the absence of permit, if any owner of the vehicle ply the vehicle, in such cases, the insurer shall pay the compensation to the claimants and it is at liberty to recover from the owner of the vehicle. The said principle of law is applicable to the facts and circumstances of present case. The Tribunal has not considered these facts seriously and rejected the above contentions of the insurer, which requires intervention by this Court. The - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51211 MFA No. 385 of 2020 insurer is liable to pay the compensation awarded by the Tribunal and it is at liberty to recover the same. 11. The amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is not in serious dispute. Therefore, there is no need to reconsider the same. 12. For the above said discussions, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i) The Appeal is allowed in part. ii) The impugned judgment and award dated 11.09.2019 passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and Addl.MACT, Udupi, in MVC No.507/2018 stands modified; iii) The insurer shall pay the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal in the impugned judgment to the claimant and it is at liberty to recover the same from the owner of the vehicle. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51211 MFA No. 385 of 2020 iv) Whatever the amount deposited by the appellant shall be transmitted to the Tribunal for disbursement. v) Draw award accordingly. Registry is directed to send back the records along with a copy of this judgment to the concerned Tribunal. Sd/- (UMESH M ADIGA) JUDGE AG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11