- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010510722022 NC: 2026:KHC:40057 MFA No. 7603 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.7603 OF 2022(MV-I) BETWEEN: MR SATHISH S/O LATE RAGHAVAN AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS R/AT DOOR NO. 8-70, KAJILA KATA, TENKULIPADY VILLAGE TENKULIPADY, MALAIPANCHAYATH MANGALURU-574 165 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. PRAKASHA K V, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MR ANWAR IBRAHIM AGA S/O IBRAHIM, ADULT, RESIDING AT VITTALGATTI BELEGULI POST, ANKOLA UTTARA KANNADA 581 314 2. THE MANAGER, RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD AT COMMERCIAL COMPLEX, 4TH FLOOR LIGHT HOUSE HILL ROAD, HAMPANKATTA, MANGALURU D.K-575 001 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. D. VIJAYAKUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2, NOTICE TO R1 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 02.11.2021 PASSED IN MVC Digitally signed by PANKAJA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010510722022 NC: 2026:KHC:40057 MFA No. 7603 of 2022 NO. 17/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, MANGALURU, DAKSHINA KANNADA, DISMISSING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K ORAL JUDGMENT The claimant has preferred this appeal against the judgment passed in MVC No.17/2019 dated 02.11.2021 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and II Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Mangaluru, D.K. (for short, 'the Tribunal'), whereby the Tribunal dismissed the claim petition filed by the claimant. 2. The brief facts of the case are, on 04.09.2018 at about 01:40 p.m. the claimant was riding the motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-19-EK-3548 at Tadambial-Surinje road, Kodipady Madhya, Mangaluru City, at that time, the Tata LPT Lorry bearing registration No.KA-30-A-1060, driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against the motorcycle of the claimant. As a result, the claimant sustained grievous injuries and he was admitted in the Hospital for treatment. Thereafter, he filed a claim petition before the - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010510722022 NC: 2026:KHC:40057 MFA No. 7603 of 2022 Tribunal claiming compensation for the injuries he sustained in the accident. 3. In order to prove his case before the Tribunal, the claimant himself examined as PW.1 and examined one witness on his behalf as PW.3-Doctor, who treated him so also got marked several documents. 4. The Tribunal, upon assessment of oral and documentary evidence, dismissed the claim petition filed by the claimant. The said judgment is challenged in this appeal by the claimant. 5. Heard learned counsel Sri Prakasha K.V. for the appellant and learned counsel Sri D. Vijayakumar for respondent No.2. 6. Apart from urging several contentions, learned counsel for the claimant-appellant contended that the Tribunal has grossly erred while dismissing the claim petition, despite the claimant placed sufficient documents before the Tribunal to prove the accident in question and also the negligence on the part of the driver of the offending lorry. He further contended - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010510722022 NC: 2026:KHC:40057 MFA No. 7603 of 2022 that the evidence of PW.3-Doctor clearly reveals that due to the accident, the claimant sustained grievous injuries and disability. In such circumstance, without any valid reason, the Tribunal discarded the evidence of PW.3 and also the documents placed on behalf of the claimant. As such, he prays to allow the appeal by awarding just compensation either by this Court or remand the matter back to the Tribunal for reconsideration of the entire evidence and documents available on record, with a liberty to lead further evidence along with the documents. 7. This contention of the learned counsel for the claimant is not seriously objected by the learned counsel for the Insurance Company. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company fairly submits that in view of the documents placed by the claimant, the same has to be tested by the Tribunal along with the evidence of PWs.1 and 3. As such, he submits that the matter may be remitted back to the Tribunal for fresh consideration. He further contended that the claimant is not entitled for the interest from the date of filing of this appeal till disposal of the claim petition. - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010510722022 NC: 2026:KHC:40057 MFA No. 7603 of 2022 8. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the impugned judgment so also the other documents made available before this Court. 9. On careful perusal of evidence on record, though the Tribunal has observed that the accident itself is in doubt for the reason that the documents placed by the RC owner of the motorcycle i.e., Jagadish, depicts that he was the rider of the motorcycle at the time of accident and the claimant was a pillion rider. The said contention of the RC owner is contrary to the claim petition and the evidence of PW.1-claimant. However, on careful examination of evidence and documents on record, soon after the accident, the jurisdictional Police lodged the FIR against the driver of the lorry based on the complaint lodged by claimant. Subsequently, the said Police investigated the case and laid charge sheet against the driver of the offending lorry. Nevertheless, soon after the accident, the claimant was admitted at Sreenivasa Hospital, Mangalore. To that effect, he has placed the documents. The discharge summary also reveals that he was admitted to the Hospital on the date of accident i.e., 04.09.2018 and thereafter he was discharged on - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010510722022 NC: 2026:KHC:40057 MFA No. 7603 of 2022 12.09.2018 as per Ex.P13. In such circumstances, the Tribunal is not justified in holding that the accident itself is in question. 10. No doubt, the contention raised by the owner of motorcycle is that he was riding the motorcycle at the time of accident. However, in the same time, he has stated that the claimant was pillion rider. Even in that case also, the claimant is entitled for compensation, since the accident in question and the injuries sustained by the claimant are not in dispute. These aspects of the matter are not properly dealt by the Tribunal. In such circumstances, as rightly contented by the learned counsel for the claimant, I am of the considered view that the matter requires reconsideration at the hands of the Tribunal. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: O R D E R i. The appeal is allowed. ii. The judgment dated 02.11.2021 passed in MVC No.17/2019 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and II Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Mangaluru, D.K., is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Tribunal for fresh consideration. - 7 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010510722022 NC: 2026:KHC:40057 MFA No. 7603 of 2022 iii. The parties are at liberty to lead any further evidence and to produce any documents, if any. iv. The Tribunal is at liberty to frame any additional issues, if requires to dispose of the case. v. The parties shall appear before the Tribunal on 07.09.2026 without expecting any further notice. vi. Since the accident is of the year 2018, the Tribunal is requested to dispose of the claim petition at the earliest. vii. Registry is directed to send back the TCR along with certified copy of the judgment to the concerned Tribunal forth with. SD/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE HKV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15