SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2020 Supreme(Kar) 327

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
S.N. Satyanarayana, H.P. Sandesh, JJ.
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. - Appellant
Versus
T. Thimmanna And Others - Respondents
M.F.A. No. 5499/2017 (MV-I) c/w M.F.A. No.5889/2017 (MV-I)
Decided On : 20-02-2020

Advocates Appeared:
Sri. Janardhan Reddy, Advocate, for the Appellant in M.F.A. No.5499/2017 & Respondent No. 2 in M.F.A. No.5889/2017; Sri. Kumara B, Advocate, for the Respondent No. 1 in M.F.A. No.5499/2017 & Appellant in M.F.A. No.5889/2017; Sri. B.R. Vinod Kumar, Advocate, for the Respondent No. 2 in M.F.A. No.5499/2017

The main legal point established in the judgment is that fraudulent claims and actions will not be tolerated by the court, and justice cannot coexist with fraud.

Headnote:

Fraudulent Claim - Motor Accident Compensation - Karnataka Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Section 166, Section 168 - The court found that the accident was caused by the negligence of the claimant and not the other party involved. The court set aside the compensation awarded and dismissed the appeal for enhancement of compensation. The claimant was found to have played a fraudulent role in creating false documents. The court also imposed a cost of Rs.50,000 on the claimant.

Fact of the Case:

The claimant was involved in a motor accident and filed a claim seeking compensation for the injuries suffered. The appeal by the insurer was in challenge to the liability, and the appeal by the claimant sought enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the accident was caused due to the negligence of the claimant and not the other party involved. The court set aside the compensation awarded to the claimant and dismissed the appeal for enhancement of compensation. The claimant was found to have played a fraudulent role in creating false documents.

Issues: The issues involved the liability for the accident, the validity of the claim for compensation, and the fraudulent actions of the claimant in creating false documents.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the evidence presented, including the delay in filing the complaint, discrepancies in the police documents, and the fraudulent actions of the claimant and other parties involved. The court emphasized that fraud and justice cannot coexist.

Final Decision: The court allowed the appeal filed by the insurer, set aside the compensation awarded, and dismissed the appeal for enhancement of compensation. A cost of Rs.50,000 was imposed on the claimant. The insurer was entitled to recover a sum of Rs.8,00,000 released in favor of the claimant with interest at 6% per annum.

JUDGMENT

1. These two appeals are filed impugning the judgment and award dated 15.04.2017 in M.V.C.No.2690/2016 on the file of Court of Small Causes and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru (SCCH-16).

2. The appeal in M.F.A.No.5499/2017 is by the second respondent-insurer before the Tribunal. The appeal in M.F.A.No.5889/2017 is by the claimant- Thimmanna T. before the Tribunal. The appeal by the second respondent-insurer is in challenge to the liability, inasmuch as the accident involving vehicle insured with the insurer itself is in challenge. So far as the appeal by the claimant is in seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

3. Brief facts leading to filing of these two appeals are as under:

    The Trial Court records which are secured would indicate following particulars namely, on 22.03.2015 at about 7.00 p.m., claimant-Thimmanna T. was proceeding towards his pomegranate garden on motorcycle bearing Registration No. KA-50-R-7042. According to him, an unknown motorcycle bearing Registration No.KA-06-EP- 1468 coming from opposite direction hit him and sped away from the spot. Thereafter, the claimant, who was lying on the road was shifted to local Government Hospital at Sira where he was given initial treatment. Subsequently, on the advice of the doctor at Government Hospital, Sira, he was shifted to M.S. Ramaiah Hospital at Bengaluru where he was inpatient for 43 days from 22.03.2015 to 01.04.2015 initially and subsequently, it is stated that he was readmitted on the very next date namely, 02.04.2015 and discharged on 01.05.2015. It is stated that he has taken prolonged treatment.

    4. Further, he has also taken treatment for two days on 10.05.2015 and 11.05.2015 in Narayana Heart Centre thereby, clearly indicating that the claimant before the Tribunal has suffered grievous injuries in the accident involving his motorcycle and another unknown motorcycle for which he has taken treatment not only in Government Hospital at Sira for the first time, but also in M.S. Ramaiah Hospital, Bengaluru for 43 days and in Narayana Heart Centre for two days.

    5. Thereafter, it is seen that claim petition is filed by the claimant seeking compensation for the injuries suffered by him. The claim petition is filed against the owner of motorcycle bearing Registration No. KA-06-EP- 1468 and its insurer namely, United India Insurance Company Limited. In the said proceedings, the documents which are produced would reveal that the complaint regarding accident was filed by the son of the claimant on 25.03.2015 at 3.15 p.m. in Pattanayakanahalli Police Station where the complaint is registered in Crime No.47/2015. The said FIR would indicate, accident having taken place on 22.03.2015 at 7.00 p.m., while the victim was riding motorcycle bearing Registration No. KA-50-R- 7042, he was hit by unknown motorcycle.

    6. The reason for filing the complaint belatedly is that, immediately after the accident, victim was taken to different hospitals and it is in this background, the complaint is registered belatedly. It is seen that the complaint is investigated by Sub-Inspector of Police Pattanayakanahalli Police Station, who has filed charge sheet in C.S.No.58/2015 on 06.06.2015 vide Ex.P3 which would indicate that one Lakshmikanth, rider of motorcycle bearing Registration No.KA-06-EP-1468 has caused the accident. There is nothing on record to indicate, who informed the Investigating Officer about the accident and in what manner, the accident has taken place.

    7. To analyze this, if we look into the records, the first of the mahazar which is drawn for seizure of the vehicle which has caused the accident is at Ex.P5 dated 20.04.2014 in the beginning, as if the mahazar is recorded on that day. However, in the end of the mahazar, the date is shown as 22.03.2015. Even assuming for a moment that there is a mistake in writing the year and accepting that mahazar is drawn on 20.04.2015, the moot point that arise is, until 20.04.2015 i.e., for nearly

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

    Please visit our Training & Support
    Center or Contact Us for assistance

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon Back to top