- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010473172014 NC: 2026:KHC:43775 MFA No. 3626 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 3626 OF 2014 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SRI SURESH S/O MUNISWAMI, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/O DODDIPALYA, KENGERI, BANGALORE. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SUKUMARAN G., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. M/S UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., BANGALORE REGIONALL OFFICE (HUB), 1ST FLOOR, NO.25, SHANKARANARAYANA BUILDING, M.G. ROAD, BANGALORE-01 REPRESENTED BY ITS IN CHARGE MANAGER INSURER OF THE VEHICLE BEARING REGN. LNO.KA-03-M-6418, POLICY NO: 072382/31/10/02/00002319 VALIDITY. 02/12/2010 TO 01/12/2011. 2. SAJIDHA . K.C. BABU, MAJOR IN AGE, R/O NO.66, SRINIVASANAGAR, SRIGANDADAKAVALU, BANGALORE-560 091. (OWNER FO THE VEHICLE) Digitally signed by PADMASHREE SHEKHAR DESAI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010473172014 NC: 2026:KHC:43775 MFA No. 3626 of 2014 3. PRAKASH . B S/O, BANDEKEMPEGOWDA MAJOR IN AGE, R/AT. NO.405, SRIGANDADAKAVALU, SUNKADAKATTE, SRIGANDANAGAR, BANGALORE-560 091. (R.C. OWNER OF THE VEHICLE) …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ANNOP SEETHARAM RAO, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. B.C. SEETHARAMA RAO ADVOCATE FOR R1; R3- SERVED V/O DATED 31.07.2018, NOTICE TO R2 H/S) THIS MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED09.12.2013 PASSED IN MVC NO.2165/2011 ON THE FILE OF VI ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE & XXXI ACMM, MACT, BANGALORE (SCCH-2), DISMISSING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED ON 31.07.2026 COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT THIS DAY, P SREE SUDHA J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA CAV JUDGMENT This appeal is filed against the judgment and award dated 09.12.2013 passed by the VI Additional Small Causes Judge, XXX ACMM, Bangalore, in MVC No.2165 of 2011. 2. The injured claimant met with an accident on 06.02.2011 and filed a claim application claiming compensation - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010473172014 NC: 2026:KHC:43775 MFA No. 3626 of 2014 of Rs.9,00,000/-. The Tribunal, considering the entire evidence on record, dismissed the application. 3. Aggrieved by the said order, this appeal is preferred by the appellant-claimant mainly contending that, on 06.02.2011 at about 2.30 p.m., he was travelling in an Auto Rickshaw bearing registration No.KA-05-AC-3640, at that time, the driver of the Maruthi 800 Car bearing Registration No.KA- 03-M-6418 driven in a rash and negligent manner dashed against the Autorickshow. As a result, the claimant sustained fracture of shaft left femur and other grievous injuries all over the body. He was given first aid treatment at Raja Rajeshwari Hospital Bangalore. Then he was shifted to Sanjay Gandhi Hospital Accident at Bangalore, where he was in patient from 06.02.2011 to 21.02.2011, and also underwent CRIF with IMIL nalling surgery to the fractured parts and was treated for other grievous injuries. It is contended that he spent about Rs.1,10,000/- for the food medical, and conveyance expenses. He was working as Mason drawing a salary of Rs.7,500/- p.m. Due to the accidental injuries, he could not attend to his work. Byatarayanapura Traffic Police registered a case in Crime - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010473172014 NC: 2026:KHC:43775 MFA No. 3626 of 2014 No.26/2011 against the driver of the Maruthi 800 Car bearing Registration No.KA-03-M-6418 of the offences U/s 279, 337 and 338 of IPC, R/W Sec.187 of M.V. Act and he was also charge sheeted in CC No.167/2011. The 2nd Respondent is the owner and 3rd Respondent is the R.C.Owner of the said vehicle and the same has been insured with the 1st Respondent and the Insurance Police was in force as on the date of accident. As such all the Respondents are liable to pay compensation. It is also contended that the Tribunal without considering the evidence of PW1 to PW3 dismissed the claim petition. It is contended that though the driver of the offending car has been charge sheeted and later convicted, the tribunal has wrongly erred in holding that the accident is due the rash and negligent driving by the claimant. The Tribunal also stated that there was delay of one day in lodging the complaint and also relied оп Exhibit P13 and P13(a). It is also contended that though driver Maruthi 800 Car pleaded guilty, it was not considered by the Tribunal. Therefore, requested this Court to set aside the order of the Tribunal. - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010473172014 NC: 2026:KHC:43775 MFA No. 3626 of 2014 4. Heard the arguments of learned counsel appearing for both sides. 5. Though the petitioner stated that was going as passenger in an Auto Rickshaw bearing Reg. No.KA-05-AC- 3640 and met with an accident on 06.02.2011, due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of Maruthi 800 Car bearing No.KA-03-M-6418, as per the evidence of MRO of the Rajarajeshwari Hospital has been examined as RW1 and he has produced Authorisation letter, MLO extract, inpatient record and outpatient chit, as per Exhibits R1 to R4 respectively and also the evidence of CMO of the Rajarajeshwari Hospital who has been examined as R.W.2. He has deposed that the MLC extract which refers to the petitioner is in his handwriting and he had recorded the history as per the say of the petitioner. He has stated the history of RTA as "sustained injuries when the auto toppled in which he was travelling on 6.2.2011 at about 2.45 a.m. near Kengeri (Krishnapriya Choultry)”. As per IMV Report under Exhibit P4, it stated that two vehicles are involved in accident, but inspector has inspected one vehicle bearing registration No.KA-03-M-6418 Maruti 800. - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010473172014 NC: 2026:KHC:43775 MFA No. 3626 of 2014 6. ExP-5 is the Rough Sketch. It shows that Auto rickshaw has come from Uttarahalli road to Mysore - Bidadi main road and the car has come from parallel road of Uttarahalli road towards Mysore Bidadi road. At that juncture, accident has occurred. In the cross examination, P.W.1 has stated that car hit the Auto rickshaw to its right side and has voluntarily stated that when new driver of the Auto rickshaw was about to take left turn, then the driver of the car came from its right side and dashed the Auto rickshaw. So front right side of the car ought to have been damaged and not rear bumper as stated in Ex.P.4-IMV Report. The damages found on the car in Ex.P-4-IMV Report and the spot of occurrence of the accident Ex.P-5/Rough Sketch are contrary to each other. Auto rickshaw has not been subjected for Inspection for the reasons best know to the petitioner. Therefore, learned counsel for the respondent argued that the police joined hands with the owner of the car, but the petitioner and filed charge sheet against the owner of the car to gain compensation wrongfully. - 7 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010473172014 NC: 2026:KHC:43775 MFA No. 3626 of 2014 7. Perusal of MLC extract shows that petitioner gone to the hospital on 06.02.2011 at 03.15 p.m. When the accident occurred at 02.30 p.m., he was taken by one Prakash in 108 ambulance. In the history of the accident, it is stated that auto stopped and he sustained injuries. But he was discharged against medical advice on the same day at 05.10 p.m. Even in the declaration of the discharge, under Exhibit R3, one lady by the name Ammu, who is his sister, signed and affixed her thumb impression. Petitioner was diagnosed for fracture of left femur at junction of middle lower one third. In Exhibit R4 outpatient chit also, it was stated that he sustained injury when he was travelling in the auto rickshaw and it toppled. He has not produced MLC extract of Rajarajeshwari Hospital, but produced accident register of Sanjay Gandhi Hospital marked as Exhibit P13 and Exhibit P13(a), which shows that he has gone to the hospital on 06.02.2011 at 08.00 p.m. and stated while he was going in an auto which got upside down after being hit by a car. Registration number of the autorickshaw and registration number of the car are subsequently inserted. In the cross-examination of PW1, he stated that he does not - 8 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010473172014 NC: 2026:KHC:43775 MFA No. 3626 of 2014 know the name of the driver and registration number of the autorickshaw in which he was travelling. CMO of the Sanjay Gandhi Hospital has not sent information to the jurisdiction of Byatarayanapura traffic police after MLC case. But he himself gave complaint on 10.02.2011. Even in the complaint under Exhibit P2, registration number of the auto rickshaw is tampered. Considering all these factors in detail, the Tribunal has held that while petitioner was travelling in an auto, it toppled due to the negligence of the driver of the auto. Though he stated the same fact in MLC extract at Rajarajeshwari Hospital, he got discharged himself against medical advise, manipulated the report and implicated the car to gain wrongfully. 8. The main contention of the petitioner is that the charge sheet is filed against driver of the car. But, mere filing of charge sheet is not sufficient. It is for the petitioner to prove the manner of accident, involvement of the vehicle, rash and negligence of the driver offending vehicle. The petitioner failed to prove the involvement of the offending vehicle in view of - 9 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010473172014 NC: 2026:KHC:43775 MFA No. 3626 of 2014 tampering of the medical records filed at the earliest point of time. 9. This Court finds no illegality or infirmity in the said order of the Tribunal. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed confirming the order of the Tribunal. Sd/- (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE CS CT:NR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 71