- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29487 MFA No. 3 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 3 OF 2023 (MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. VENKATARAVANAMMA W/O LT NANJIREDDYA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS 2. SRI.RAMACHANDRA M.N., S/O LATE NANJIREDDY AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS 3. SRI.SURESH M.V., S/O LATE NANJIREDDY AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS ALL ARE R/O MAMADI MAKALAPALLI VILLAGE, NARAMUDDEPALLI POST RACHERUVU GRAMA PANCHAYATH BAGEPALLI TALUK NOW R/AT HAROHALLI KASABA HOBLI KOLAR DISTRICT …APPELLANTS (BY SMT.KALPANA P.V., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. SHAIK BABAJAN S/O KHADAR VALI MAJOR R/AT NO 3-203-9 REDDIVARIPALLI VILLAGE AMADAGURU POST ANANTHAPUR DIST AN`DHRA PRADESH Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29487 MFA No. 3 of 2023 2. M/S IFFCO TOKIO GEN. INS. CO. LTD., BRANCH OFFICE NO. 41, 2ND FLOOR, CHIRISTY COMPLEX LAVELLE ROAD BANGALORE -1 REP. BY MANAGER …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.SHIVANNE GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI.B.PRADEEP, ADVOCATE FOR R2 R1- SERVED) THIS MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 23.09.2022 PASSED IN MVC NO.235/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MACT, BAGEPALLI, DISMISSING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. 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 award passed in MVC.No.235/2014 dated 23.09.2022 by the Senior Civil Judge, Bagepalli, whereby the trial court had dismissed the claim petition on the ground that the offending vehicle is implicated in this case, the claimant is before this court. 2. The claim petition is filed seeking compensation of an amount of Rs.10,00,000/- for the death of the deceased in the road traffic accident dated 12.01.2011. The ground on which the claim petition is dismissed is that - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29487 MFA No. 3 of 2023 the vehicle which is seized by the police immediately after the accident and vehicle against which the charge sheet is filed, they are two different vehicles. The trial court has observed that the claimant ought to have examined the investigating officer or the eyewitness in support of their case. The trial court has observed that, except examining PW-1 who is the wife of the deceased and who is not an eyewitness, the claimants have not taken any other steps to prove the accident. In the light of the fact that the charge sheeted vehicle and the vehicle involved in the accident is not one and the same, the claim petition is dismissed. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits the there is no dispute about the accident and involvement of the vehicle which is a new vehicle and which has a temporary registration. It is submitted that if not on this vehicle they are entitled for compensation against the other vehicle which is involved in the accident. Learned counsel further submits that if the matter is remanded back to trial court they will be able to adduce the evidence. Considering the submission of the learned - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29487 MFA No. 3 of 2023 counsel for the claimants/insurance company and balancing the interest of the parties. i) Accordingly, the appeal is Allowed and the award passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Bagepalli in MVC.No.235/2014 dated: 23.09.2022 is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the trial court for fresh consideration. ii) It is open to both the parties to raise their respective contentions, objections and adduce additional evidence if any with regard to compensation. iii) The Registry is directed to return the Trial Court Record to the Tribunal along with the certified copy of the order passed by this court forthwith without any delay. iv) No Costs. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE TS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 52