- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43923 MFA No. 5026 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.5026 OF 2024(MV-I) BETWEEN: SRI. VIJAYA KUMAR B.S., S/O SHAMBA SHIVARADYA. B V AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS NO. 172, GROUND FLOOR 13TH MAIN 1ST CROSS BHUVANESHWARINAGAR K P AGRAHARA MAGADI ROAD BENGALURU-560 023. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. GIRIMALLAIAH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., UNIT-IV , 9TH FLOOR, LEVEL-06 GOLD HEIGHTS COMPLEX 5TH C CROSS INDUSTRIAL SUB URB Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43923 MFA No. 5026 of 2024 RAJAJINAGAR BANGALORE 560 001 BY ITS MANAGER. 2. SMT. SOWMYA PRIYA W/O KUMAR J MAJOR (AGE OF R 2 NOT KNOWN TO APPELLANT) RESIDENT OF FN-327, 2ND FLOOR, B BLOCK, PRRAMID BANKSIA APARTMENT, JAKKUR ROAD, SHIVANAHALLI, BENGALURU-560 064. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRADEEP B., ADVOCATE) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.01.06.2024 PASSED IN MVC NO.2912/2023 ON THE FILE OF THE XXII ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSE JUDGE AND ACMM, MEMBER, MACT, BENGALURU, (SCCH-24), DISMISSING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43923 MFA No. 5026 of 2024 ORAL JUDGMENT Aggrieved by the dismissal of MVC.No.2912/2023 dated 01.06.2024 by the XXII Addl. SCJ and ACMM, Member-MACT, Bengaluru, the claimant is before this Court. 2. The claim petition is filed seeking compensation under Section 166 of Indian Motor Vehicles Act. It is the case of the claimant that on 24.02.2023 at about 12.00 noon, while the claimant was proceeding in his Honda Activa on the left side of Mysore-Bengaluru Highway road, opposite to Udupi Hotel at Babasahebara Palya Check post, Kengeri Hobli, Bengaluru, at that time, the driver of the Renault Triber Car came at high speed in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the claimant’s vehicle from behind, result of which he fell down along with his motorcycle and sustained grievous injuries. Immediately, he was taken to the hospital. Respondent No.1/Insurance Company had denied the involvement of the vehicle as it is the case of hit and run. Though the charge sheet is filed against another vehicle, it do not disclose how, and when the things have come into light. The Tribunal, by order impugned had dismissed the claim petition. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43923 MFA No. 5026 of 2024 3. While dismissing the claim petition, the Tribunal had observed that the Tribunal generally places reliance on the FIR, spot sketch and charge sheet in all cases when there is no serious dispute by the Insurance Company. Though the Court is not examining the correctness of the charge sheet, but the Court has to take judicial note of the conduct of the Investigating Officers who are investigating the road traffic accident cases. The charge sheet submitted cannot be accepted as a gospel truth in all the cases. In recent years, it has become rampant where Investigating Officer in connivance with the claimant and also the owner of the vehicle involved in the accident are distorting the facts to suit their purpose and accordingly to enable them to claim compensation. In the first instance, the alleged vehicle number is not mentioned. The claimant has not produced rough sketch, notice u/Sec.133 of IMV Act and reply given to the said notice. The claimant has not examined the Investigating Officer and not elicited the mode and methodology adopted by him in conducting the case and filing charge sheet against the alleged offending vehicle. There is no iota of material placed on record to let the Court know how the Investigating Officer has traced the alleged - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43923 MFA No. 5026 of 2024 offending vehicle as the vehicle involved in the accident. Though PW3 has been examined to prove the case of the claimant, but as observed supra he is not at all an eyewitness to the accident. He is planted as an eyewitness to the accident. Hence, leaving apart proving the rash and negligent act on the part of the driver of alleged offending vehicle, the claimant has failed to prove the very involvement of offending vehicle in the accident, accordingly, had dismissed the claim petition. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant/ claimant submits that if an opportunity is given and the order impugned is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Tribunal, he would get an opportunity to adduce further evidence and the matter may be remanded back to the Tribunal. 5. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1/ Insurance Company submits that the claimant had not filed all the documents before the Tribunal. The complete charge sheet and MLC are not filed. The Tribunal would be able to appreciate the statement of the witnesses under Section 161 of CrPC. It is submitted that the Tribunal under these suspicious - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43923 MFA No. 5026 of 2024 circumstances had rightly dismissed the claim petition and there are no grounds to interfere with the well considered order passed by the Tribunal. 6. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the material on record. There is no dispute about the fact that it is a case of hit and run. The accident had taken place on 24.02.2023, the FIR was registered on 25.02.2023. On that day, which is the vehicle involved in the accident was not mentioned in the FIR. Thereafter, they have filed a charge sheet against the vehicle. As rightly contended by respondent No.1/Insurance Company, how the police have found this vehicle and been involved in this case is not known. Nothing is forthcoming in the evidence on record and the Tribunal had rightly dismissed the claim petition, however considering the plight of the claimant and to give a reasonable opportunity to both the parties, the matter has to be remanded back to the Tribunal. 7. Accordingly, the appeal of the claimant is allowed by setting aside the award passed in MVC.No.2912/2023 dated 01.06.2024 by the XXII Addl. SCJ and ACMM, Member- - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43923 MFA No. 5026 of 2024 MACT, Bengaluru and the matter is remanded back to the Tribunal for fresh consideration. i. The parties shall appear before the Tribunal without further notice on 17.12.2025. ii. All contentions are kept open to both the parties. iii. Registry is directed to send the records to the Tribunal along with the certified copy of the order passed by this Court forthwith without any delay. iv. No Costs. v. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE BN List No.: 2 Sl No.: 12