- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26960 MFA No. 4852 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.4852 OF 2022(MV-I) BETWEEN: THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD NEW MUSLIM HOTEL COMPLEX OPP: FIRE BRIGADE SARASWATHIPURAM, MYSURU THORUGH ITS BENGALURU REGIONAL OFFICE NO.44/45, LEO SHOPPING COMPLEX 4TH FLOOR, RESIDENCY ROAD CROSS BENGALURU-560 025 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER …APPELLANT (BY SRI. S.V HEGDE MULKHAND, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. E SUNDRAMMA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS W/O S.M. YOGANARASIMHA MURTHI R/O ANNAPURNESHWARI NAGAR KYTHUMGERE, NEW EXTENSION MANDYA CITY-571 401. 2. PUTTASWAMY S/O VEERAIAH MAJOR IN AGE R/NO 322, 2ND CROSS Digitally signed by PANKAJA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26960 MFA No. 4852 of 2022 CHAMUNDESHWARI NAGARA MANDYA 571401 …RESPONDENTS (NOTICE TO R1 AND R2 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.25.02.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.1418/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, MANDYA, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.50,000/- WITH INTEREST AT 9 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred by the Insurance company directed against the judgment and award passed in M.V.C.No.1418/2015 by the I Additional Senior Civil Judge and CJM at Mandya and R.P.No.02/2019 passed by the Additional Senior Civil Judge and MACT at Mandya. 2. The factual matrix of the case is that on 20.04.2015, the claimant, being a pillion rider in the motorbike bearing registration No.KA-11-R-0173, while himself and the rider of the motorbike were proceeding towards Kyathumgere, in the new extension of Annapurneshwari Nagar, a stray dog - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26960 MFA No. 4852 of 2022 suddenly came on the road, on account of which, the rider lost control over the motorbike and hit the dog causing an accident. As a result, the claimant fell down and sustained injuries. Subsequently, after three days, the claimant lodged a complaint before the jurisdictional police. After investigation, police laid charge sheet against the rider of the motorbike. Hence, the claimant filed claim petition for compensation for the injuries sustained by him in the accident. 3. The claim petition was opposed by the insurance company before the Tribunal. 4. On assessment of oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal has partly allowed the claim petition and granted a global compensation of Rs.50,000/- which shall be paid by owner-cum-driver of the motorcycle. Subsequently, the claimant has filed a Review Petition No.2/2019 challenging the award, which came to be allowed and the Court directed the Insurance company to pay the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. Feeling aggrieved by the same, this present appeal is filed by the insurance company. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26960 MFA No. 4852 of 2022 5. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant/insurance company. 6. Apart from urging several contentions, the learned counsel for the appellant primarily contended that the Tribunal erred while awarding compensation without considering the evidence on record. According to him, the claimant has not sustained any injury due to the accident as stated by him. There is an inordinate delay in lodging the complaint and the Ex.R1 - the medical record history given before the doctor by the claimant depicts that the accident had occurred due to self fall from the motorbike. In such circumstances, the Tribunal has erred in awarding compensation and saddling liability on the insurance company. He also contended that the owner of the motorbike is none other than the elder brother of the claimant, who was not examined before Tribunal. Accordingly, he prays to allow the appeal. 7. Though notice was served to the respondents, they remained absent. 8. I have given my anxious consideration to the submission made by the learned counsel for the respective - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26960 MFA No. 4852 of 2022 parties and perused the evidence and documents available on record. 9. No doubt, there is delay of three days in lodging the complaint. However, on perusal of the FIR and the chargesheet materials, it is specifically stated that the accident had occurred due to the obstruction by a stray dog on the road and the sudden apply of break by the rider of the motorcycle. Further, the claimant has taken treatment in the hospital as an outpatient. In Ex.R1, it is stated that the injury is due to self fall from the bike. That itself cannot be a ground to disbelieve the version of the claimant that he had not at all sustained injury due to the accident. Three days delay in lodging the FIR is also not fatal to the case of the appellant and the accident cannot be disputed solely on that ground as held by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjubhai vs. New India Insurance Company reported in 2025 (1) SCC 414. 10. In that view of the matter, I am of the considered view that the Tribunal has rightly awarded the global compensation saddling the liability on the insurance company. However, the Tribunal has awarded 9% interest for the amount - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26960 MFA No. 4852 of 2022 awarded. The same has to be reduced to 6% as per the law laid by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Ms. Joyeeta Bose and others vs. Venkateshan V., and others in M.F.A.No.5896/2018. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part. 11. The amount in deposit, if any, shall be transmitted to the Tribunal. SD/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE CR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27