- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18582 M.F.A. No.2061/2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.2061/2018 (MV-I) BETWEEN: THE MANAGER NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., SHIMOGA BRANCH, FIRST FLOOR S.S.COMPLEX ABOVE HARSH BANGALORE HONAVAR ROAD P.B. NO.151, SHIMOGA REP BY ITS REGIONAL OFFICE SHUBHARAM COMPLEX 144 M.G. ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. A. RAVISHANKAR, ADV.,) AND: 1. SMT. YASHODAMMA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS W/O NAGARAJ R/O. 2ND CROSS MARIYAMMA STREET DEVARAHALLI, VIJAYANAGARA BHADRAVATHI NOW RESIDING AT MALLADIHALLI VILLAGE HOLALKERE TALUK-577301 CHITRADURGA DISTRICT. 2. SRI. ARMUGAM M.S. S/O LATE MURUGESH JAYANAGARA DEVARAHALLI POST Digitally signed by ARSHIFA BAHAR KHANAM Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18582 M.F.A. No.2061/2018 BHADRAVATHI-577301 SHIMOGA DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS (R1 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED V/O/DTD:17.11.2025, NOTICE TO R2 IS H/S) - - - THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN MVC NO.383/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, HOLALKERE, PERUSE THE SAME AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AWARD DATED 27.12.2017 PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, HOLALKERE AND ALLOW THIS APPEAL AND GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEFS AS THE HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT TO GRANT, IN THE ENDS OF EQUITY AND JUSTICE. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the Manager, National Insurance Company Limited challenging the judgment and award dated 27.12.2017 passed in M.V.C.No.383/2013 by the Senior Civil Judge and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Holalkere (for short, 'the Tribunal'). 2. Sri.A.Ravishankar, learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that this appeal is filed by the Insurance Company only to the extent of saddling the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18582 M.F.A. No.2061/2018 liability on the Insurance Company instead of the owner of the vehicle involved in the accident. It is submitted that the accident is caused due to the rash and negligent riding of the rider of the motorcycle owned by the respondent No.1 and admittedly, on the date of accident, the rider of the motorcycle was not having a valid and effective driving licence. Hence, the entire liability to pay the compensation should have been saddled on the respondent No.1-owner of the vehicle by directing the Insurance Company to pay the said compensation amount and recover the same from the owner. In support of his contentions, he placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of SHAMANNA AND ANOTHER Vs. DIVISIONAL MANAGER, ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ORS.1 Hence, he seeks to allow the appeal. 1 2018 SCC Online SC 849 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18582 M.F.A. No.2061/2018 3. Though notice issued on the respondent No.1- claimant as well as the respondent No.2-owner of the vehicle is served, they remain absent. 4. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant and meticulously perused the material available on record. 5. The material on record indicates that on 28.07.2012, the claimant in MVC No.383/2013 met with a road accident and sustained grievous injuries. The material on record further indicates that the accident is caused due to the negligent riding of the motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-14/EC-7487 by its rider and the said vehicle is owned by the respondent No.2 herein. The appellant, in the statement of objections has clearly stated that the rider of the motorcycle was not having a valid and effective driving licence to ride the motorcycle. However, in order to substantiate the said contention, the Insurance Company has examined its Officer Sri.Y.Mohan as RW-1 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18582 M.F.A. No.2061/2018 and got marked Exs.R1 to R5. The claimant, in order to prove the claim examined herself as PW-1, examined Dr.K.B.C.Sogi as PW-2 and got marked Exs.P1 to P13. The Tribunal, at paragraph 37 made a reference with regard to the contentions raised, however, recorded the finding that the Insurance Company is liable to pay the compensation. It is to be noticed that the appellant has specifically raised a contention before the Tribunal that the rider of the motorcycle was not having a valid and effective driving licence to ride the motorcycle and they have issued the legal notice to the owner as well as the rider of the motorcycle, to produce the driving licence before the Tribunal. The copies of the said notice, acknowledgment, receipts etc. were placed before the Tribunal and marked as evidence. Admittedly, the jurisdictional police, after the investigation, filed a charge sheet against the rider of the motorcycle under Section 3(1) read with Section 181 of the Motor Vehicles Act, - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18582 M.F.A. No.2061/2018 1988, for not having a valid and effective driving licence at the time of accident. 6. Considering the oral and documentary evidence available on record, I am of the considered view that the Tribunal has grossly erred in saddling the liability on the Insurance Company. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of SHAMANNA AND ANOTHER referred supra, as well as in the case of PAPPU AND OTHERS Vs. VINOD KUMAR LAMBA AND ANOTHER2 has held that in the case of an invalid driving licence, the Insurance Company shall make good the compensation amount and recover the same from the owner of the vehicle. Keeping in mind the enunciation of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, I am of the considered view that the appeal deserves to be allowed. 7. For the aforementioned reasons, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER 2 (2018) 3 SCC 208 - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18582 M.F.A. No.2061/2018 a) The appeal is allowed in part. b) The impugned judgment and award dated 27.12.2017 passed in M.V.C.No.383/2013 by the Tribunal insofar as the liability is concerned, is set aside by holding that the respondent No.2 is liable to pay the compensation. To the aforesaid extent, the impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal is modified. c) The appellant is directed to pay the compensation and recover the same from the respondent No.2-owner of the vehicle. d) The amount in deposit shall be transmitted back to the Tribunal forthwith. e) Registry shall transmit the records to the Tribunal forthwith. Draw the modified decree accordingly. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE RV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15