- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010508882015 NC: 2026:KHC:53533 MFA No. 8635 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 8634 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.8635 OF 2015(MV-I) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.8634 OF 2015(MV-D) IN MFA No. 8635/2015 BETWEEN: RAGHAVENDRA S/O DASAPPA @ DASANNA AGE: MAJOR, OCCUPATION: BUSINESS, R/O OBAYYANAHATTI VILLAGE, NAYAKANA HATTI HOBLI CHALLAKERI TALUK CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 577 536. …APPELLANT (BY SRI SANDEEP JAIN, ADVOCATE FOR SMT.ARCHANA MURTHY P., ADVOCATE) AND: S TANUJA D/O N SOMASHEKAR, AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS, REP BY HER NATURAL GUARDIAN/ NEXT FRIEND N SOMASHEKAR, R/O GOWDAGERE VILLAGE, CHALLKERE TALUK, C/O RANGAPPA B, MADAKARIPURA VILLAGE, Digitally signed by ANUSHA V Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010508882015 NC: 2026:KHC:53533 MFA No. 8635 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 8634 of 2015 CHITRADURGA TALUK AND DISTRICT - 577 536. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI GURUDATH V.R., ADVOCATE FOR SRI SPOORTHY HEGDE N., ADVOCATE) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 08.10.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.506/14 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, & 4TH MACT, CHITRADURGA, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.20,000/- WITH INTEREST AT 8% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE REALIZATION. IN MFA NO. 8634/2015 BETWEEN: RAGHAVENDRA S/O DASAPPA @ DASANNA, AGE:35 YEARS, OCCUPATION:BUSINESS, R/O OBAYYANAHATTI VILLAGE, NAYAKANA HATTI HOBLI, CHALLAKERI TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577 536. ...APPELLANT (BY SRI SANDEEP JAIN, ADVOCATE FOR SMT.ARCHANA MURTHY, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. N SOMASHEKAR S/O NINGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 43 YARS, OCCUPATION:AGRICULTURIST, R/O GOWDAGERE VILLAGE, CHALLAKERE TALUK, C/O RANGAPPA B, MADAKARIPURA VILLAGE, CHITRADURGA TALUK & DIST-577536. - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010508882015 NC: 2026:KHC:53533 MFA No. 8635 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 8634 of 2015 2. S CHITRA @ GAYATHRI D/O N.SOMASHEKAR, AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS, OCCUPATION:NIL, 3. S NINGESHA D/O N.SOMASHEKAR, AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS, 4. S TANUJA D/O N.SOMASHEKAR, AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS, REP BY HER NATURAL GUARDIAN/ NEXT FRIEND N.SOMASHEKAR, ALL THE RESPONDENTS ARE R/O GOWDAGERE VILLAGE, CHALLAKERE TALUK, C/O RANGAPPA B, MADAKARIPURA VILLAGE, CHITRADURGA TALUK & DIST-577536. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI GURUDATH V.R., ADVOCATE FOR SRI SPOORTHY HEGDE NAGARAJA, ADV. FOR R1; R2 & R3 NOTICE SERVED & UNREPRESENTED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 08.10.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.505/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, & IV MACT, CHITRADURGA, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF Rs.9,65,950/- WITH INTEREST @ 8% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION. THESE APPEALS ARE COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010508882015 NC: 2026:KHC:53533 MFA No. 8635 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 8634 of 2015 ORAL JUDGMENT Challenging common judgment and award dated 08.10.2015 passed by I Additional Senior Civil Judge & IV MACT, Chitradurga in MVCs no.505 and 506 of 2014, these appeals are filed. 2. Sri Sandeep Jain, learned counsel for appellant appearing for Smt.Archana Murthy, advocate for appellant submitted that appeals are by owner of offending vehicle challenging award on liability. 3. Brief facts leading to these appeals as stated by claimants are that at 4:00 p.m. on 18.10.2013, Mytramma and others were travelling in auto-rickshaw no.KA-16-B-4005 from Duggavara village to Challakere, its driver drove it in a rash and negligent manner due to which it went out of control and toppled on left side of road. Due to severity of injuries sustained in accident, Mytramma though taken to Government Hospital, Challakere and thereafter to District Government Hospital, Chitradurga, succumbed to injuries. S. Tanuja, a minor aged 15 years travelling in said auto sustained grievous injuries and despite treatment did not recover fully and - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010508882015 NC: 2026:KHC:53533 MFA No. 8635 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 8634 of 2015 sustained loss of earning capacity. Alleging loss of dependency on account of death of Mytramma, her husband and children filed MVC no.505/2014 while S. Tanuja filed MVC no.506/2014 against appellant under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (MVA). 4. On service of notice, appellant entered appearance and filed objections stating that as on date of accident, he was not owner of vehicle and it was sold to one T. Manjunath S/o Thimmappa, Bommasandra village, Challakere for Rs.88,500/- on 23.08.2012 and out of which he had received Rs.50,500/- and balance remained to be paid. On 31.10.2012, he had executed Special Power of Attorney in favour of said Manjunatha to have RC of vehicle transferred. Therefore, as per agreement and Special Power of Attorney, he was not owner of vehicle and therefore, not liable to answer claims. 5. Based on pleadings, Tribunal framed following issues: IN MVC NO.505/2014 1. Whether the petitioners prove that, deceased Mythramma W/o.N.Somashekar sustained fatal injuries and died in the alleged RTA occurred on 18-10-2013 at about 4-00 p.m. near SH-19, Bellary road, near Chitrayyanahatti cross, - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010508882015 NC: 2026:KHC:53533 MFA No. 8635 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 8634 of 2015 Challakere, on account of actionable rash and negligence of driving of auto rickshaw bearing Reg.No.KA-16-B-4005? 2. Whether the Petitioners are entitled for compensation? If so, at what quantum? 3. What order or award? IN MVC NO.506/2014 1. Whether the petitioner proves that, she has sustained injuries in R.T.A occurred on 18-10- 2013 at about 4-00 p.m. SH-19, Bellary road, near Chitrayyanahatti cross, Challakere, due to rash and negligent manner of driving of the Auto Rickshaw bearing Reg.No.KA-16-B-4005 by its driver? 2. Whether the Petitioner is entitled for compensation? If so, how much? 3. What order/award? 6. Claimants examined three witnesses as PWs.1 to 3 and got marked Exhibits P1 to P13. Appellant deposed himself as RW.1 and got marked Special Power of Attorney as Exhibit R1. 7. On consideration, Tribunal held accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of auto by its driver and claimants were entitled for compensation. It assessed compensation of Rs.9,65,950/- in MVC no.505/2014 and Rs.20,000 in MVC no.506/2014 along with interest at 8% per - 7 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010508882015 NC: 2026:KHC:53533 MFA No. 8635 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 8634 of 2015 annum from date of petition till deposit. Aggrieved by same, these appeals were filed. 8. It was submitted that as per objections and deposition of appellant, auto in question was sold to Manjunath on 23.08.2012 for total sale consideration of Rs.88,500/- and receiving Rs.50,500/- and with balance to be paid within one month. Thereafter, appellant executed Exhibit R1 - Special Power of Attorney in favour of said purchaser. In view of above, appellant was not owner of vehicle as per Section 2(30) of MVA and therefore, impugned award was contrary to law and liable to be set-aside. On above grounds, sought for allowing appeals. 9. On other hand, Sri Gurudath VR., learned counsel appearing for Sri Spoorthy Hegde N., advocate for respondents - claimants opposed appeals. It was submitted, while passing impugned awards, Tribunal had addressed contentions of owner and on noting that contrary to his stand, it was appellant who have taken release of vehicle by executing Exhibit P13 - indemnity bond disbelieved defence and passed award. It was submitted that MV Act and Rules make provision for transfer in a specified manner. Since transfer claimed was not in - 8 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010508882015 NC: 2026:KHC:53533 MFA No. 8635 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 8634 of 2015 accordance with law and name of appellant continued in RC as owner, he was liable and sought dismissal. 10. Heard learned counsel, perused impugned judgment and award and record. 11. From above only point that arises for consideration is: "Whether Tribunal was justified in holding appellant liable to pay compensation?" 12. There is no dispute about occurrence of accident involving insured auto in accident on 18.10.2013, leading to death of Mytramma and injuries to S. Tanuja due to rash and negligent driving of auto by its driver. Said vehicle appears to be uninsured at that time. Only defence set up by appellant was vehicle was transferred in favour of one Manjunath, after receiving advance consideration and in view of balance payment of portion of consideration, a Special Power of Attorney was executed in favour of purchaser. Despite taking contention about sale of vehicle and transfer of ownership, appellant did not take steps for impleading such purchaser. There were no assertions about execution of necessary - 9 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010508882015 NC: 2026:KHC:53533 MFA No. 8635 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 8634 of 2015 documents for transfer of ownership of vehicle as per law and for taking steps to intimation of sale to jurisdictional Transport Authority. Besides, as noted by Tribunal, contrary to stand, Exhibit P13 would indicate that it was appellant, who executed indemnity bond and obtained release of vehicle from Police, after it was seized in relation to accident in question. 13. In view of above, there are no good grounds against award. Appeals are dismissed. Amount in deposit is directed to be transmitted to Tribunal for disbursal. Sd/- (RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE AV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4