- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26804 MFA No. 4333 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 4342 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.4333 OF 2021(MV-D) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.4342 OF 2021(MV-D) IN MFA No. 4333/2021 BETWEEN: THE MANAGER M/S THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, NO.44/45, LEO SHOPPING COMPLEX, RESIDENCY ROAD, BANGALORE-560 025 REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. B.S UMESH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. ANITHA N W/O LATE GIRISH S, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, 2. MASTER ULLAS G S/O LATE GIRISH S, AGED ABOUT 11 YEARS, SINCE MINOR REPREENTED BY HIS MOTHER & NATURAL GUARDIAN, BOTH THE RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 ARE RESIDING AT NO.98/1, NERIGE, SARJAPURA CIRCLE, KUGURU, ANEKAL, BENGALURU-562125. Digitally signed by PANKAJA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26804 MFA No. 4333 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 4342 of 2021 3. CHANNARAYAPPA S/O MUNIVENKATA REDDY, AGED MAJOR, EXACT NOT KNOWN TO APPELLANT, RESIDING AT NO.184, THUBHARAHALLI, RAMAGONDAHALLI POST, BENGALURU-560 066. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. A. SREENIVASAIAH ADVOCATE FOR C/R1 & R2 (CP NO 9318/21) SRI. SRINATH P, ADVOCATE FOR R3) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 20.04.2021 PASSED IN MVC NO. 3960/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER, MACT, XVIII ADDTIIONAL JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU CITY (SCCH-4), AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS. 32,82,000/- WITH INTREST AT 6 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION. IN MFA NO. 4342/2021 BETWEEN: THE MANAGER, M/S THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED NO.44/45, LEO SHOPPING COMPLEX, RESIDENCY ROAD, BANGALORE-560 025, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER. ...APPELLANT (BY SRI. B.S UMESH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SHIVAPRIYA G D/O GOVINDARAJU, AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS, WAS MINOR WHEN THE PETITION WAS FILED NOW HAS ATTAINED MAJORITY, RESIDING AT NERIGE, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26804 MFA No. 4333 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 4342 of 2021 SARJAPURA CIRCLE, KUGURU, ANEKAL, BENGALURU-562125. 2. CHANNARAYAPPA S/O MUNIVENKATA REDDY, AGED MAJOR, EXACT NOT KNOWN TO APPELLANT RESIDING AT NO.184, THUBHARAHALLI, RAMAGONDAHALLI POST, BENGALURU-560 066. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. A. SREENIVASAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1 (CP NO.9319/21) SRI. P. SRINATH, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 20.04.2021 PASSED IN MVC NO. 3961/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER, MACT, XVIII ADDITIONAL JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU CITY (SCCH-4), AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS. 16,14,000/- WITH INTEREST AT 6 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION. THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26804 MFA No. 4333 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 4342 of 2021 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. The Insurer has filed these appeals challenging the judgment and award dated 20.04.2021 passed by the Tribunal in MVC.Nos.3960 and 3961/2019. 2. The factual matrix of the case is that on 22.06.2019 at about 5.40 a.m., when Girish deceased in MVC.No.3960/2019 was riding a motorcycle bearing registration No.KA01-HD-8543 along with his sister Ratnamma deceased in MVC.No.3961/2019, near Tippasandra Gate, Neriga Gujur Road, a water tanker bearing registration KA01-AJ-5661 driven in a rash and negligent manner by its driver, came in the opposite direction with high speed and dashed against the motorcycle, as a result of which, both the rider and the pillion rider sustained severe injuries and succumbed to the same on the spot. Thereafter, based on the complaint, the jurisdictional police registered the FIR and laid a charge sheet against the driver of the offending vehicle. Subsequently, the claim petitions were filed by the family members of the deceased in MVC.Nos.3960 and 3961/2019. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26804 MFA No. 4333 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 4342 of 2021 3. The Tribunal, on assessment of the evidence adduced before it, has come to the conclusion that the driver of the offending vehicle was responsible for the accident which has resulted in the death of both Girish and his sister Ratnamma. The Tribunal has thereafter proceeded to award compensation of Rs.32,82,000/- in MVC.No.3960/2019 and Rs.16,14,000/- in MVC.No.3961/2019 along with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realization. Aggrieved by the same, the Insurer is before this Court in these appeals. 4. Though this appeal is of the year 2021, the learned counsel for the Insurer is absent and there is no representation for the Insurer. 5. However, in the appeal memo, it is stated by the Insurer that the Tribunal has failed to consider that the vehicle involved in the accident is a water tanker and it was admitted fact that the said vehicle hit from the opposite direction and hence, the rider of the motorcycle could have easily avoided the accident on seeing the oncoming vehicle. It is further stated that the evidence and police documents discloses that the rider of the motorcycle made no attempt to avoid the accident and - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26804 MFA No. 4333 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 4342 of 2021 therefore, the Tribunal could have attributed 50% contributory negligence on the deceased i.e., the rider of the motorcycle. As such, the Tribunal has erred in saddling the entire liability on the insurer. He has also contended that the amounts awarded under all the heads are exorbitant and needs to be reduced. Accordingly, he prays to allow the appeals. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the claimants supported the impugned judgment and award and contended that the Tribunal, after meticulously examining both oral and documentary evidence, has rightly awarded the compensation and therefore, the same do not call for any interference by this Court. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss the appeals. 7. I have given my anxious consideration to the contentions of both the parties and perused the materials on record. As could be gathered from the records, the accident in question and the coverage of insurance policy to the offending vehicle are not in dispute. Though it is contended by the Insurer in both the appeals that the deceased i.e., the rider of the motorcycle had equally contributed negligence to the accident, on careful examination of Ex.P3 i.e., the spot mahazar, the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26804 MFA No. 4333 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 4342 of 2021 same depicts that the accident has occurred on the south corner of the road. As such, it could be presumed that the driver of the offending vehicle drove the water tanker in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the motorcycle, resulting in the death of both the rider and the pillion rider. Even otherwise, the police, after investigating the case, have laid a charge sheet against the driver of the offending vehicle, which was not challenged by the Insurance Company. In order to prove the defence, the Insurer has not examined any concerned except the Social Welfare Officer of the Company as R.W.1 and there is no such evidence elicited in the cross- examination of P.Ws.1 and 2 to substantiate that the deceased i.e., the rider of the motorcycle has contributed negligence to the occurrence of the accident. In such circumstances, in my considered view, the Tribunal has rightly held that there was no contributory negligence on the part of the deceased i.e., the rider of the motorcycle. 8. As regards award of compensation in both the cases is concerned, in my view, the Tribunal has rightly considered the income, age and other aspects concerning to the deceased in - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26804 MFA No. 4333 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 4342 of 2021 both the cases. As such, I find no good ground to interfere with the impugned judgment and award. Accordingly, both the appeals lack merit and are dismissed. 9. The amount in deposit shall be transmitted to the concerned Tribunal for disbursement in accordance with the award of the Tribunal. SD/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE PKS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 75