- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010107602020 NC: 2026:KHC:40446 MFA No. 3719 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.3719 OF 2020(MV-I) BETWEEN: THE MANAGER THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, 1ST FLOOR, T.G.M.A BUILDING, J . ROAD, TUMAKURU CITY-572 101 HEREIN REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL OFFICE THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD., LEO SHOPPING COMPLEX, RESIDENCY ROAD CROSS, BANGALORE-560 025 BY ITS MANAGER …APPELLANT (BY SRI. H.C VRUSHABHENDRAIAH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. SHIVAKUMAR S/O SHIVALINGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/O THALEKOPPA VILLAGE, CHELUR HOBLI, GUBBI TALUK, NOW R/O C/O CHIKKARANGAIAH, S/O B RANGAIAH, Digitally signed by PANKAJA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010107602020 NC: 2026:KHC:40446 MFA No. 3719 of 2020 WARD NO.5, BEHIND SRIRAMA TEMPLE, BHEEMASANDRA, TUMAKURU CITY-572 101 2. SRI MUBARAK PASHA S/O ISAK PASHA, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, R/AT NEAR YASMEEN MASJID, SADASHIVANAGAR, TUMAKURU-572 101 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MANJUNATHA K, ADVOCATE FOR R1, VIDE ORDER DATED 05/06/2023, NOTICE TO R2 IS HELD SUFFICIENT) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.21.10.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.1188/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE VI ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, TUMAKURU, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.2,08,000/- WITH INTEREST AT 6 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL DATE OF DEPOSIT. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010107602020 NC: 2026:KHC:40446 MFA No. 3719 of 2020 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K ORAL JUDGMENT The insurance company has preferred this appeal against the judgment and award dated 21.10.2019 passed in M.V.C.No.1188/2015 by the VI Additional District and Sessions Judge at Tumakuru (for short, 'the Tribunal'), whereby the Tribunal partly allowed the claim petition and awarded a compensation of Rs.2,08,000/- with 6% interest to the claimant - respondent No.1. 2. The factual matrix of the case is that on 10.12.2014 at about 07.00 p.m. the claimant was proceeding in his motorbike bearing registration No.KA-06-EG-1114 at NH-206 road, near Bheemasandra Circle. At that time, the rider of the motorbike bearing registration No.KA-06-EH- 8354 came in a rash and negligent manner from the opposite direction and dashed against the motorbike of the claimant. As a result, the claimant fell down and sustained injuries. Immediately, he was shifted to Government Hospital, Tumakuru. Thereafter, he was shifted to Nimhans Hospital, - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010107602020 NC: 2026:KHC:40446 MFA No. 3719 of 2020 Bengaluru from there to Dr. K.Narasimhaiah Hospital, Tumakuru. As such, he filed a claim petition before the Tribunal claiming compensation for the injuries sustained in the accident. 3. The Tribunal upon oral and documentary evidence, partly allowed the claim petition filed by the claimant as stated supra. The said judgment and award is challenged by the insurance company is in this appeal. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant- Insurance Company so also learned counsel for respondent No.1-claimant. Though the notice was served to respondent No.2-insured, he remained unrepresented. 5. Apart from urging several contentions, the learned counsel for the appellant–Insurance Company primarily contended that, as on the date of the accident, the driver of the offending vehicle was not holding a valid and effective driving licence. Though the Insurance Company had issued notice calling upon the owner and the driver to - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010107602020 NC: 2026:KHC:40446 MFA No. 3719 of 2020 produce the driving licence, they failed to comply with the same. It was, therefore, contended that there was a clear breach of the policy conditions and, consequently, the liability to satisfy the award ought to have been fastened on the owner–insured. 6. Placing reliance on Ex.R4–the insurance policy relating to the offending vehicle, learned counsel further submitted that the owner had paid only the basic third-party premium of Rs.464/- and no premium was paid towards own damage coverage. In such circumstances, the liability of the Insurance Company was limited in nature. It was contended that these material aspects have not been properly appreciated by the Tribunal. Accordingly, he prayed for allowing the appeal. 7. Per contra, the learned counsel for respondent No.1–claimant contended that the Tribunal, upon a meticulous appreciation of the entire evidence on record, has rightly passed the impugned judgment and award, which - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010107602020 NC: 2026:KHC:40446 MFA No. 3719 of 2020 does not call for any interference by this Court. Accordingly, he prayed for dismissal of the appeal. 8. I have given my anxious consideration to the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for respondent No.1 so also perused the entire documents available on record. 9. As could be gathered from the records, the occurrence of the accident and the existence of a valid insurance policy covering the offending motor vehicle are not in dispute. Upon appreciation of the entire material on record, including the investigation documents, the Tribunal has fastened the liability on the appellant–Insurance Company. On careful perusal of Ex.R4–copy of the insurance policy, it is evident that respondent No.1–insured has paid a total premium of Rs.514/- under the head 'B' Liability. 10. In the aforesaid circumstances, the insurance policy covers the liability towards third parties. Hence, the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that the - 7 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010107602020 NC: 2026:KHC:40446 MFA No. 3719 of 2020 Insurance Company is not liable to satisfy the award cannot be accepted. Insofar as the further contention that the driver of the offending vehicle was not holding a valid and effective driving licence as on the date of the accident is concerned, the said issue is no longer res integra in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in PAPPU VS. VINOD KUMAR LAMBA AND ANOTHER, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 208, and NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. VS. SWARAN SINGH, reported in (2004) 3 SCC 297. In the light of the aforesaid authoritative pronouncements, the liability to satisfy the award is required to be fastened on the insurer with liberty to recover the same from the insured. Accordingly, the impugned judgment and award stand modified to the said extent. 11. As regards the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the various heads, upon careful examination of the material on record, I find that the same is just and proper and does not warrant interference by this Court. - 8 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010107602020 NC: 2026:KHC:40446 MFA No. 3719 of 2020 Accordingly, no grounds are made out to interfere with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 12. However, in view of the law laid down in the aforesaid judgments, the appellant–Insurance Company is liable to satisfy the award in the first instance, with liberty to recover the same from the insured in accordance with law. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part. 13. The amount in deposit, if any, shall be transmitted to the Tribunal. SD/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE CR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2