- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1481 MFA No. 201526 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.201526 OF 2023 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SANGAPPA S/O KRISHNAPPA ANKALAGI, AGE: 43 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O HIRE-ASANGI, TQ. B. BAGEWADI, NOW RESIDING AT KEERTI NAGAR, VIJAYAPURA. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SANGANAGOUDA V. BIRADAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. RASHID S/O BIKKANASAB BEPARI, AGE: 41 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O KOLHAR, TQ. B. BAGEWADI, DIST. VIJAYAPURA-586 210. 2. THE MANAGER LEGAL/CLAIMS, CHOLAMANDALAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., 1ST FLOOR, V.A. KALBURGI SQUARE, DESHPANDE NAGAR, DESAI CROSS, HUBLI-29. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MANJUNATH MALLAYYA SHETTY, ADV. FOR R2; R1-SERVED) Digitally signed by SHIVALEELA DATTATRAYA UDAGI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1481 MFA No. 201526 of 2023 THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL BY SETTING ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 03.12.2022 PASSED BY THE LEARNED PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT-V, AT VIJAYAPURA IN MVC NO.815/2021 AND PASS REASONABLE AWARD. ALTERNATIVELY THE HON’BLE COURT MAY KINDLY BE PLEASED TO REMAND THE MATTER TO THE LEARNED TRIBUNAL FOR A FRESH TRIAL PROVIDING OPPORTUNITY TO LEAD THE FURTHER EVIDENCE OF APPELLANT. THIS APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR JUDGMENT ON 04.03.2025 AND COMING ON FOR ‘PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT’, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. JOSHI CAV JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. JOSHI) Being aggrieved by the judgment of dismissal in MVC No.815/2021 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and Member MACT-V, Vijayapura dated 03.12.2022, the petitioner is before this Court in appeal. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1481 MFA No. 201526 of 2023 2. The factual matrix of the case is that on 16.06.2021 at about 5.30 p.m. when the petitioner was riding motorcycle bearing No.KA-28/EV-5578 from Kolhar towards Asangi, a Bolero Pickup van bearing No.KA-28/D- 2730 came from behind in a negligent manner and while overtaking the petitioner, it brushed the motorcycle resulting in the petitioner falling down and sustaining injuries. Immediately he was taken to Bhagyawanti Hospital, Vijayapura. Petitioner contended that he was agriculturist, earning Rs.30,000/- per month and he has suffered permanent disability and as such he is entitled for compensation from the respondent No.1 and 2 who are the owner and insurer of Bolero pickup van. 3. Responding to the notice, the respondent No.1 and 2 appeared before the Tribunal and the respondent No.2 alone contested the petition. The respondent No.2-Insurer contended that there was no such accident as contended by the petitioner, the compensation claimed is a highly exorbitant, imaginary and denied the age, income and - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1481 MFA No. 201526 of 2023 occupation of the petitioner. It was also alleged that the accident occurred due to negligence of the petitioner himself. 4. The Tribunal framed appropriate issues and the petitioner was examined as PW1 and Ex.P1 to Ex.P8 were marked. The respondent No.2 summoned 3 documents and examined its official as RW1 marking Ex.R1 to R3. 5. After hearing the arguments, the Tribunal dismissed the petition holding that the petitioner had fallen on his own and the involvement of Bolero Pickup van is not proved. 6. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this Court in appeal. 7. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant / petitioner contended that the Tribunal failed to assess the available evidence on record. It is contended that the FIR and the charge sheet clearly show that after investigation the driver of the Bolero van was prosecuted for negligent driving. It is contended that simply because the hospital - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1481 MFA No. 201526 of 2023 records showed that it was a self fall from his bike, the Tribunal could not have dismissed the petition. 8. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2 submits that the medical records including case sheet which has come into existence out of spontaneity, unequivocally show that it was an accident by the petitioner himself and the Bolero van has been implicated later. It is pointed out that there is delay of more than 24 hours in filing the complaint and there are discrepancies in the damages suffered by the Bolero van. Therefore, he seeks dismissal of the appeal. 9. A perusal of the FIR at Ex.P1 and the complaint at Ex.P2 would show that the petitioner was riding the motorcycle on 16.06.2021 with one Harsha as a pillion rider. It is stated that the Bolero came from behind and while overtaking the motorcycle of the petitioner, it brushed on the right side of the motorcycle, resulting in the petitioner falling down. Thereafter, he was shifted to hospital. The complaint was lodged on 17.06.2021 at about 6.30 p.m. Evidently, - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1481 MFA No. 201526 of 2023 there is a delay of more than 24 hours in filing the complaint. 10. The Ex.P2, spot mahazar shows that it was conducted on 18.06.2021 at about 9.30 a.m. and both the vehicles were found at the spot. The Bolero had scratch marks on its left door and the motorcycle had damages on the front bumper and right crash guard. 11. The MVI report at Ex.P4 shows that it was inspected on 22.06.2021 and it was found that the Bolero had a dent on the right side front door. It is evident that this discrepancy between the spot mahazar at Ex.P3 and the MVI report at Ex.P4 raises a doubt as to whether the version of the petitioner could be believable. 12. The Ex.P5 wound certificate shows that the petitioner was admitted to Bhagyawanti Hospital on 16.06.2021 at about 7.40 p.m. with history of self fall from bike and was discharged on 20.06.2021. The Ex.R3 which is the case sheet of Bhagyawanti Hospital shows that - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1481 MFA No. 201526 of 2023 immediately on admission to the hospital, the petitioner had informed that it was self fall from the bike and he had suffered laceration on the right knee measuring 6 x 5 cms and there was no fracture. The case sheet is clear in this regard. The copy of the police intimation which is found in the case sheet also disclose that the hospital authorities had informed that the RTA was self fall from the bike near Kolhar to Asangi road at 5.30 p.m. 13. The above evidence on record establishes that except the FIR and charge sheet, all other records indicate the self fall from the bike. Cross examination of the PW1 shows that he has denied these entries in the medical records. The Tribunal after analyzing the evidence has come to the conclusion that the involvement of the Bolero van is doubtful. The doubt of the Tribunal get the impetus from the discrepancy in the damages occurred to the Bolero van. Therefore, this Court does not find any reason to interfere with the conclusion reached by the Tribunal. The delay in filing the complaint and not explaining the noting in the hospital records by a competent person of the hospital and - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1481 MFA No. 201526 of 2023 the discrepancy in the dent occurred to the Bolero van raise a genuine doubt about the involvement of the vehicle of the respondent No.1. Obviously, the respondent No.1 has not chosen to come on record either to accept or deny the fact of the accident. Thus the fact that the petitioner fell from the bike on his own gets the support from the case sheet, the police intimation issued by the hospital, the delay in filing the complaint, the Bolero van suffering the dent on the right side. The owner of the Bolero van not appearing to contest the case is also a circumstance which gains importance. The rule of preponderance of probability tilts against the petitioner. 14. For the aforesaid reasons, the appeal is bereft of any merits. Hence, the following: ORDER The appeal is dismissed. Sd/- (C M JOSHI) JUDGE SMP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 63 CT: AK