- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9104 MFA No. 2070 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 2070 OF 2016 (MV-I) BETWEEN: 1. MR. VASU S/O. MADHAVAN, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/AT NO. 19, 4TH CROSS, 2ND MAIN, HANUMAGIRI NAGAR, CHIKKALLASANDRA, BENGALURU 560078 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. T N VISWANATHA.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. M/S SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD BRANCH OFFICE, NO. S-5, 2ND FLOOR, MONARCH CHAMBERS, INFANTRY ROAD, BENGALURU 560001. 2. SRI. PALANI S/O. BALACHARI, MAJOR, R/AT NO. 8-492/B, Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9104 MFA No. 2070 of 2016 THOTAPALEM, CHITTOR, ANDRA PRADESH - 410029 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. O MAHESH FOR R1., ADVOCATE) (R2 IS SERVED, BUT UNREPRESENTED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED18.06.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.5528/12 ON THE FILE OF THE 8TH ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSE JUDGE & 33RD ACMM, MEMBER, MACT, BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA ORAL JUDGMENT Heard the arguments of both sides. 2. This appeal is filed by the appellant-claimant against the judgment and the award of the tribunal passed in MVC.No.5528/2012 dated 18.06.2015 by the VIII Additional Small Causes Judge AND XXXIII ACMM, MEMBER - MACT, Court of Small Causes (SCCH-5), Bengaluru. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9104 MFA No. 2070 of 2016 3. Injured - claimant met with an accident on 30.05.2012 and filed a claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.7,50,000/-. The tribunal considering the entire evidence on record dismissed the petition. 4. Aggrieved by the said order, he preferred an appeal and mainly contended that the appellant/claimant met with an accident on 30.05.2012, but the trial Court has misinterpreted the police records. Appellant has taken treatment in Ashoka Hospital, but the medical records are disbelieved. As per the medical records, he met with an accident on 30.05.2012. The finding of the trial Court that the appellant/claimant struck over the parked vehicle and not the lorry as pleaded in the petition is not proper. Appellant's case was registered as an MLC case, and the accident occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending lorry, and thus, he requested this Court to set aside the order. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9104 MFA No. 2070 of 2016 5. The case of the petitioner is that on 30.05.2012 at about 10.45 a.m. while he was riding a motorcycle bearing KA-41-U-7679 on NH7, from Bangalore towards Krishnagiri, along with a pillion rider near Kamana Doddi, another lorry bearing No.AP-03-TA-3003 came in a rash and negligent manner, at high speed and struck the motorcycle while taking it into reverse. As a result, petitioner sustained injuries. He was immediately shifted to Ashoka Hospital, Hosur. Later, he was shifted to St. John's Hospital, Bangalore, and he took treatment as an inpatient. 6. He spent Rs.1,00,000/- towards treatment and medical expenses. He was working as a tiles worker and earning Rs.750/- per day. It was reported to the police on 02.06.2012. The complaint was written on 29.05.2012 instead of 30.05.2012. Crime No.225/2012 was registered against the lorry driver. The owner of the lorry did not appear even after service of summons and he was placed ex-parte. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9104 MFA No. 2070 of 2016 7. The first respondent- insurer appeared through the counsel and filed objections and stated that there is no accident as pleaded by the petitioner; the lorry was falsely implicated to make a claim. No policy was issued by them to the lorry. He denied the involvement of a lorry and the two wheeler. The first respondent also disputed the medical evidence and stated that there is no negligence of the lorry driver in the accident. 8. The complaint is given by the pillion rider on 29.05.2012, but the date of the accident as per the petitioner is 30.05.2012, and the case was registered on 02.06.2012. IMV was done on 03.06.2012 in the RTO Office campus in Hosur. Petitioner countered that, in FIR and complaint, the date of accident was wrongly mentioned as 29.05.2012 instead of 30.05.2012. But the Investigating Officer was examined as RW.1 and he produced the FIR and stated they have closed the case as a false case without filing any charge sheet; as such, the tribunal observed the question of the incident being - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9104 MFA No. 2070 of 2016 happened as pleaded cannot be considered. As per Ex.P7 petitioner has gone to government hospital on 30.05.2012, but as per Ex.P8, he has taken treatment in Ashoka Hospital and been discharged against medical advice on 31.05.2012. As per Ex.P9, the appellant was sent to the Government Hospital at his request. 9. The Ex.P7 is a computerized slip; the date alone was mentioned in handwriting. The petitioner has taken treatment in the Ashoka Hospital from 30.05.2012 to 31.05.2012, and the discharge is against medical advice. According to him, later from Ashoka Hospital, he was referred to St. John's Hospital. But he has not stated how he filed the documents from the government hospital. As per the FIR, while the petitioner was going in the crossroad, the lorry driver struck the two wheeler in a rash and negligent manner. But as per the petitioner, two wheeler has been struck while lorry was taking reverse. The tribunal observed that there was no corroboration of the material facts. As per Ex.P4, the lorry was inspected - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9104 MFA No. 2070 of 2016 on 03.06.2012 and there was no damage. But in Ex.P5, the two wheeler was inspected on the same day and it has extensive damage on the left side and front headlight another portion, and thus the tribunal observed that the petitioner had struck the other parked vehicle but not the lorry as pleaded. 10. It was also observed that the Investigating Officer closed the FIR as a mistaken fact. As per Ex.P.13, he was admitted to the Ashoka Hospital on 30.05.2012 at about 12:04 and discharged on 31.05.2012 at 11:45., but no a.m. or p.m. is mentioned. The MLC is also registered, but it was not filed before the Court. With the said observation and also considering the citations filed before the trial Court, the tribunal dismissed the petition. Admittedly, the date of the accident is 30.05.2012, but the complaint is one day prior to that, that is, on 29.05.2012, and it is a material discrepancy that goes to the root of the case, and it was not explained properly. Even the Investigating Officer said that the FIR itself was closed as - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9104 MFA No. 2070 of 2016 a false case without filing the charge sheet. So merely because the medical record is produced by the petitioner, it cannot be considered that he met with an accident and sustained injuries in view of the above discrepancies in the evidence. Therefore, this Court finds that there are no merits in the appeal and accordingly, I pass the following order: ORDER The appeal is dismissed confirming the judgment and award of the tribunal. Sd/- (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE RCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 79