- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1453 MFA No. 200755 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 200754 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. JOSHI MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.200755/2018(MV-I) C/W. MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.200754/2018(MV-D) IN MFA NO.200755/2018: BETWEEN: THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, SHRIRAM GEN. INS. CO. LTD., CTS NO.477/1M-1, 1ST FLOOR, V.A. KALABURAGI HALL MARK BUILDING, DESAI CROSS, PINTO ROAD, HUBLI-20, (THROUGH AUTHORISED SIGNATORY). …APPELLANT (BY SRI SUBHASH MALLAPUR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. ANKUSH S/O NARAYAN CHOPADE, AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: TEACHER, R/O HOLE-KHURD, TQ. MADHA, DIST. SOLAPUR-410 001. 2. SANTOSHKUMAR RATH S/O GOURANGA CHARAN RATH, AGE: 47 YEARS, OCC: TRANSPORT BUSINESS, Digitally signed by SHIVALEELA DATTATRAYA UDAGI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1453 MFA No. 200755 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 200754 of 2018 R/O ABHIMANYU PANIGRAHI, RAMPA STREET, BEHRAMPUR, GANJAM-760001, STATE ODISSA-760 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI BASAVARAJ R. MATH, ADV., FOR R1; R2 - NOTICE DISPENSED WITH) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE ABOVE APPEAL AND CONSEQUENTLY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 15.12.2017 PASSED BY THE II ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE AND MEMBER MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL NO.3 VIJAYAPUR IN MVC NO.154/2015. IN MFA NO.200754/2018: BETWEEN: THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, SHRIRAM GEN. INS. CO. LTD., CTS NO. 477/1M-1, 1ST FLOOR, V.A. KALABURAGI HALL MARK BUILDING, DESAI CROSS, PINTO ROAD, HUBLI-20, (THROUGH AUTHORISED SIGNATORY). …APPELLANT (BY SRI SUBHASH MALLAPUR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. NARAYAN S/O DAGADU CHOPADE, AGE: 59 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE, R/O HOLE-KHURD, NOW R/O INDI ROAD, VIJAYAPUR-586 101. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1453 MFA No. 200755 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 200754 of 2018 2. ANKUSH S/O NARAYAN CHOPADE, AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: TEACHER, R/O HOLE-KHURD, TQ. MADHA, DIST. SOLAPUR-410 001. 3. SANTOSHKUMAR RATH S/O GOURANGA CHARAN RATH, AGE: 47 YEARS, OCC: TRANSPORT BUSINESS, R/O ABHIMANYU PANIGRAHI, RAMPA STREET, BEHRAMPUR, GANJAM-760 001, STATE ODISSA. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI BASAVARAJ R. MATH, ADV., FOR R1 AND R2; R3 - NOTICE DISPENSED WITH) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE ABOVE APPEAL AND CONSEQUTNLY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 15.12.2017 PASSED THE BY II ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE AND MEMBER MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL NO.3, VIJAYPUR, IN MVC NO.19/2015. THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. JOSHI) 1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellant- Insurance Company and learned counsel appearing for the respondents-claimants in both the appeals. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1453 MFA No. 200755 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 200754 of 2018 2. These appeals are by the Insurance Company being aggrieved by the common judgment and award dated 15.12.2017 passed in MVC Nos.19/2015 and 154/2015 by the Member, MACT-3, and II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Vijayapura, (for short ‘the Tribunal’). 3. The parties would be referred to as per their rank before the Tribunal for the sake of convenience. 4. The factual matrix of the case is as below: a) On 15.02.2014, the petitioner – Ankush in MVC No.154/2015 and his mother were traveling on the motorcycle bearing No.MH-45/V-0725 and at about 7.45 a.m., at Varade Village Toll Naka, a Container Truck bearing No.OR-07/Q-8482 came from back side and brushed the motorcycle of the petitioner, resulting in the rider and pillion rider falling down and the Container Lorry run over the hand of the deceased Laxmi. They were shifted to the hospital and it was found that the deceased Laxmi died on the way to the hospital. The petitioner – Ankush was treated in the hospital for ten days. The injured petitioner – Ankush and his father filed claim petitions before the Tribunal respectively in MVC No.19/2015 - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1453 MFA No. 200755 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 200754 of 2018 and 154/2015, contending that the deceased Laxmi was aged 55 years, doing agricultural work and earning Rs.7,500/- per month. It was stated that the petitioner-Ankush suffered fracture of the right radial head, fracture base of 5th metacarpal and proximal phalanges over little finger of right hand and that he was a Teacher, hence, they are entitled for the compensation. b) On being served with the notice, the respondent- Insurance Company appeared before the Tribunal and the owner of the lorry did not appear and as such, placed as ex- parte. c) The Insurance Company contended that there was no involvement of the lorry bearing No.OR-07/Q-8482 and driver of the vehicle was not having valid driving license and as such, there was violation of the terms and conditions of the policy. Inter alia it was also contended that there was delay of 10 days in filing the complaint to the Police, therefore, the Container Lorry has been falsely implicated in the case. Alternatively, it was also contended that the rider of the - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1453 MFA No. 200755 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 200754 of 2018 motorcycle was negligent and as such, there is contributory negligence on the part of the petitioner-Ankush. d) On the basis of contentions of the parties, appropriate issues were framed by the Tribunal and the petitioners examined PW1 and marked the documents at Exs.P1 to P9 in evidence. The respondent – Insurance Company examined its official as RW1 and Exs.R1 was marked. e) After hearing both the sides, the Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.1,62,000/- in respect of the death of the deceased Laxmi in MVC No.19/2015 and Rs.50,000/- in respect of MVC No.154/2015 regarding the injuries sustained by the petitioner – Ankush, and fastened the liability on the Insurance Company to pay the compensation to the petitioners. Aggrieved by the same, these appeals are filed. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant- Insurance Company submits that the delay of 10 days in filing the complaint has not been properly appreciated by the Tribunal. It is submitted that the registration number of the Container Lorry was disclosed for the first time after ten days of the accident and therefore, there is circumstance which creates - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1453 MFA No. 200755 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 200754 of 2018 doubt. Secondly, it is urged that the post mortem was conducted without registering the crime and therefore, the proceedings followed by the Police is totally incorrect and it gives room for doubt about the accident itself. It was further contended that the MVI report does not mention about the damages to any of the vehicles and therefore, the very happening of the accident itself is doubtful. 6. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent – petitioners defends the impugned common judgment and award by saying that the procedural lapse on behalf of the concerned Police cannot be a ground to deny relief to the petitioners. He submits that the post mortem was conducted after inquest panchnama and for this the Police had followed the procedure in respect of the cases of unnatural death. Hence, it is submitted that the appeals are bereft of merits and the same to be dismissed. 7. A perusal of the complaint - Ex.P1 and its translated copy at Ex.P1(a) shows that the Police registered the case for the first time on 25.02.2014, wherein the complaint of PW1 had mentioned the vehicle number. It appears that PW1 could not - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1453 MFA No. 200755 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 200754 of 2018 lodge the complaint, since he was also under the grief of death of his mother and he also had suffered injuries in the accident. This aspect is clearly mentioned in the complaint and therefore, there is no reason to disbelieve the same. It is worth to note that when the accident occurred, it was PW1, who was the rider of the motorcycle and his mother had died in the said accident and as such, the grief suffered by the PW1 is very well understood and it cannot be accepted that he should have lodged the complaint immediately. Expecting the PW1 to lodge the complaint in the grief of death of his mother and his own injuries would be absurd proposition and this argument by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant cannot be sustained. 8. Insofar as the tracing of the vehicle is concerned, it is relevant to note that the inquest panchnama which is at Ex.P4 would show that in Column No.13, the reason for death of the deceased Laxmi was shown to be an accident between the motorcycle and the Container Lorry. Therefore, it is clear that the Police knew about the category of the vehicle which was involved in the accident, but its number was not known. This would clearly indicate that the Police had also registered a - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1453 MFA No. 200755 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 200754 of 2018 UDR case, ofcourse in No.0/2014. It is also evident that a request was made to the Hospital Authorities under Section 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to conduct the post mortem. Evidently, post mortem took place on 15.02.2014 itself. As such, the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant that the Container Lorry has been falsely implicated cannot be accepted. 9. The third submission is that the MVI Report at Ex.P9 does not show any damage to the vehicles. It is pertinent to note that as stated by the PW1 in his complaint at Ex.P1, the Container Lorry had come from behind and its body had brushed the motorcycle and touched the deceased Laxmi and as such, PW1 and the deceased Laxmi fell down. When she fell down, she suffered head injury and lorry run over the left hand of the deceased Laxmi. Obviously, it was not head-on collision. Moreover, the damages to the vehicles is not sine- qua-non for an accident. The cross-examination of the PW1 has failed to elicit nothing about the false implication of the vehicle. Under these circumstances, the appeals are bereft of any merits and hence, the following: - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1453 MFA No. 200755 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 200754 of 2018 ORDER i) Both the appeals are dismissed with costs. ii) The amount in deposit before this Court be transmitted to the Tribunal. Sd/- (C.M. JOSHI) JUDGE SBS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 59 CT: AK