- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34805 MFA No. 2565 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.2565 OF 2020(MV-I) BETWEEN: SRI RAGHUPATHI S/O AGISTHAPPA, NOW AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, RESIDING AT BELLAMBARI VILLAGE, NUKKANAHALLI POST, KOLAR TALUK & DISTRICT. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. GOPAL KRISHNA N, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. SATHYA RAJ S/O MURUGAN, MAJOR IN AGE, RESIDING AT NO.130, 7TH CROSS, H.G SLUM, BANGALORE-560 011 2. THE NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD REGIONAL OFFICE, SHUBARAM COMPLEX, M.G ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001 REP. BY ITS MANAGER …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ASHOK N PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R2, VIDE ORDER DATED 29.08.2024, NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH) Digitally signed by PANKAJA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34805 MFA No. 2565 of 2020 THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED. 11.07.2018, PASSED IN MVC NO.8314/2016, ON THE FILE OF THE XXI ACMM., AND XXIII ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND MACT, BENGALURU, (SCCH-25), DISMISSING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is directed against the judgment and award passed in MVC No.8314/2016 dated 11.07.2018 by the Court of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Court of Small Causes at Bengaluru (SCCH-25) (for short 'the Tribunal'), whereby the Tribunal dismissed the claim petition filed by the claimant- appellant. 2. The brief facts of the case are, on 21.12.2012 at about 06:00 p.m., the claimant was walking towards Kolar from Chathrakodihalli on the mud footpath of Kolar - Tekal Road. At that time, near Halli Dhaba, one Bajaj Pulsar motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-05/HL-1592 came in a high speed and dashed the claimant from behind. As a result, the claimant fell on the road and sustained severe injuries. Subsequently, on - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34805 MFA No. 2565 of 2020 the next day i.e., 22.12.2012, the claimant lodged the complaint before the Kolar Rural Police Station, which registered in Crime No.594/2012. Later, claim petition was filed by the claimant seeking compensation for the injuries he sustained in the accident. 3. To prove his case before the Tribunal, the claimant examined himself as PW.1 and examined the Doctor who treated him as PW.2 so also marked 10 documents as Exs.P1 to P10. The Insurance Company examined one witness as RW.1 and marked 2 documents as Exs.R1 and R2. 4. The Tribunal, on assessment of oral and documentary evidence, dismissed the claim petition filed by the claimant. Being aggrieved by the same, the claimant is in appeal. 5. Heard learned counsel Sri Gopal Krishna N. for the claimant-appellant and learned counsel Sri Ashok N. Patil for respondent No.2. 6. Apart from urging several contentions, learned counsel for the claimant-appellant primarily contended that the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34805 MFA No. 2565 of 2020 Tribunal has grossly erred by dismissing the claim petition on the ground that in Ex.R2-MLC register, wherein initially the history of accident was mentioned as "fall from bike at 06:00 p.m. in Tekkal road on 21.12.2012". Subsequently, the said history of accident was overwritten as "hit by bike at 06:00 p.m. in Tekkal road on 21.12.2012 near Halli Dhaba". According to him, the claimant lodged the complaint on the very same day of accident, while he was an inpatient at R.L. Jalappa Hospital, Tamaka, Kolar. On the strength of said complaint, FIR came to be registered in Crime No.594/2012 dated 22.12.2012 for the offences punishable under Section 279 and 337 of IPC and subsequently, the Police investigated the case and laid charge sheet against the rider of the motorcycle. He also contended that the evidence of PW.1-claimant was unshaken in the cross-examination by the Insurance Company. In such circumstances, the Tribunal ought to have allowed the claim petition by awarding adequate compensation. As such, he prays to allow the appeal and to set-aside the impugned judgment by awarding just compensation. 7. Per contra, learned counsel for the Insurance Company by supporting the impugned judgment submitted that - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34805 MFA No. 2565 of 2020 the Tribunal, on meticulous examination of the evidence on record and other documents, dismissed the claim petition in a reasoned judgment, which does not call for any interference at the hands of this Court. According to him, Ex.R2-MLC register clearly depicts that the history of injury was overwritten as "hit by bike" by striking the words "fall from bike". That itself shows that the accident was caused due to "fall from bike". 8. He further contended that there is an inordinate delay of one day in lodging the complaint, despite the claimant admitted in the hospital on the date of accident. Further, he contended that the charge sheet was filed by the jurisdictional Police at the instance of claimant and the owner of motorcycle. He also contended that, PW.1 has been cross-examined to that effect, by way of suggestion in his cross-examination. These aspects of the matter are dealt in detail by the Tribunal and rightly dismissed the claim petition. With these submissions, he prays to dismiss the appeal. 9. I have given my anxious consideration to the submission made by the learned counsel for the respective - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34805 MFA No. 2565 of 2020 parties and perused the impugned judgment and other documents made available before this Court. 10. As could be gathered from records, it is not in dispute that the accident in question was occurred on 21.12.2012 at 06:00 p.m. and the claimant was immediately shifted to R.L. Jalappa Hospital and Research Centre at Kolar as out patient on the same day at about 06:40 p.m. In Ex.R2-MLC register, it was initially mentioned the history of accident that "fall from bike at 06:00 p.m. in Tekkal road on 21.12.2012". Subsequently, the said alleged history of accident was overwritten as "hit by bike at 06:00 p.m. in Tekkal road on 21.12.2012 near Halli Dhaba". On bare reading of insertion of place of accident and sentence which was overwritten in Ex.R2-MLC register, it could be presumed that the history of injury and place of accident was subsequently inserted in the MLC register by striking out the actual history of accident i.e., "fall from bike". 11. No doubt, the complaint has been lodged by the claimant on the very next date of accident i.e., 22.12.2012. In the said complaint, he stated that the accident was caused - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34805 MFA No. 2565 of 2020 when he was walking on the road, the offending motorcycle came and hit against him. On perusal of contents of Ex.R2-MLC register and Ex.P1-complaint filed by the claimant, a doubt arises in the mind of this Court about the credibility of the complaint lodged by the claimant that if he really sustained accidental injuries by the motorcycle while he was walking on the road, nothing prevented him to narrate the same before the Hospital while he was admitting in the Hospital. While admitting, he himself given the history of accident as "fall from bike". Strangely, on the very next day, he changed the version and stated that the accident was caused while he was walking on the road and the offending vehicle was dashed against him. 12. On perusal of Ex.P6-wound certificate, it is initially stated that the injuries sustained by the claimant are "simple in nature", subsequently, it was overwritten as "grievous in nature". As such, on meticulous examination of Ex.R2, Ex.P1 and Ex.P6, coupled with the delay of 4 years in filing the claim petition, substantiates that the same is frivolous one for unlawful gai. These aspects of the matter are dealt in detail by the Tribunal and rightly dismissed the claim petition. I find no - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34805 MFA No. 2565 of 2020 good ground to interference with the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. SD/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE HKV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 34