- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46399 MFA No. 1437 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1437 OF 2020 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SANTHOSHKUMAR M.N, S/O NAGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, R/AT NO.122/2, 3RD CROSS, SHIVAN BEEDI DEFENCE COLONY, NAGASANDRA POST, BANGALORE - 560 073, AND ALSO AT SINGONAHALLI VILLAGE AND POST, GUBBI TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572 427. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. KUMARA K G.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. PRASAD R., S/O RAJANNA, AGED MAJOR, NO.396, IST MAIN, 6TH CROSS, VIDYARANYA NAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 091. 2. SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., NO.10004-E-8, RIICO INDUSTRIAL AREA, SITAPURA-JAIPUR, RAJASTAN - 302 022. …RESPONDENTS Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46399 MFA No. 1437 of 2020 (BY SRI. B. C. SHIVANNE GOWDA., ADVOCATE FOR R2; V/O DATED 13.11.2025 NOTICE TO R1 IS HELD SUFFICIENT) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 18.07.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.8225/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE IX ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND XXXIV ACMM, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MEMBER, MACT-7, BENGALURU (SCCH-7), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the claimant being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 18th July 2019, passed by the IX Additional Small Causes Judge and Member, MACT- 7, Bengaluru, (for short `Tribunal'), in MVC No.8225/2011. 2. This is a claimant's appeal just to fasten the liability on the insurer to pay the compensation and to - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46399 MFA No. 1437 of 2020 recover it from the owner of the vehicle, since there was a violation of condition of the policy. 3. Though this appeal is slated for admission, with the consent of both the sides, it is taken up for final disposal. 4. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Tribunal. 5. The brief facts of the case are that, on 12.11.2011, the claimant sustained grievous injuries in a motor vehicle accident due to rash and negligent driving of a tanker lorry bearing registration No.KA-52-4013. 6. Respondent No.2-insurer denied the averments of the claim petition and denied its liability on the ground that the driver of the offending vehicle was not holding a valid and effective driving license. 7. From the rival contentions of the parties, the Tribunal framed necessary issues, for its determination. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46399 MFA No. 1437 of 2020 8. The claimant to prove his case examined four witnesses as PW-1 to PW-4 and marked 31 documents, as per Exs.P-1 to P-31. Respondents examined two witnesses as RW-1 and RW-2 and marked documents as Exs.R-1 to R-3. 9. The Tribunal after hearing both parties and appreciating the evidence available on record, awarded total compensation of Rs.10,55,045/-. 10. While determining liability, the Tribunal held that the accident occurred by a vehicle having unladen weight of 8,800 kg. Therefore, the driver of the offending vehicle ought to have held a driving licence to drive a transport vehicle; instead, he was holding a licence to drive a light motor vehicle. In view of these reasons, there was violation of a terms of the policy, and the owner of the vehicle was liable to pay the compensation. The owner has not disputed the same. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46399 MFA No. 1437 of 2020 11. It is a settled principle of law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs. Swaran Singh and Others1 and New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Vs. Yellavva and Another2, wherein it is held that if there is any breach of terms and conditions of policy, which was not a fundamental breach, then the insurer shall compensate the third party and it is at liberty to recover it from the owner of the vehicle. In the present case, the Tribunal exonerated the liability of the insurer and directed the owner of the vehicle to pay the compensation. Therefore, the appellant prays that the insurer be directed to pay the compensation with a liberty to the insurer to recover it from the owner of the vehicle, in view of the law laid down in the above said judgments. The said prayer of the appellant is acceptable. 12. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i) The Appeal is allowed in part. 1 AIR 2004 SC 1531 2 2020 ACJ 2560 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46399 MFA No. 1437 of 2020 ii) The impugned judgment and award dated 18th July 2019, passed in MVC.No.8225/2011, by the IX Additional Small Causes Judge and Member, MACT-7, Bengaluru, stands modified. iii) The respondent No.2 - Insurance Company shall pay the compensation and it is at liberty to recover it from the owner of the vehicle in an appropriate proceedings. iv) The remaining portion of the award of the Tribunal shall remain unaltered. Registry is directed to send copy of this judgment to the Tribunal. Sd/- (UMESH M ADIGA) JUDGE AMA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1