Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
UMESH M.ADIGA
Vinoda K.R, S/o. Ramakrishnayya K.L. – Appellant
Versus
Cholamandalam Ms. General Ins. Co. Ltd., By Its Manager – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
UMESH M. ADIGA, J.
1. Both these appeals arises out of the judgment and award dated 30.03.2022 passed by the I Addl.Small Causes Judge and MACT, Bengaluru (for short `Tribunal'), in MVC No.291/2020.
2. Claimant has filed MFA.No.5001/2022 seeking enhancement of compensation and owner of the vehicle has filed MFA.No.4851/2022 for fastening of the liability on the insurer.
3. Both the appeals arise out of common judgment and award, therefore they are taken up together for disposal.
4. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Tribunal.
5. The brief facts of the case are that, on 06.12.2019 at about 8.00 a.m., the petitioner was going on a motor cycle bearing registration No.KA-52-HB-7197 on Kanakapura road; Near Bolore village, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bengaluru south, he met with an accident due to rash and negligent driving of Tractor bearing registration No.KA-42-T- 5986. As a result, the claimant fell down and sustained grievous injuries. He has spent substantial amount towards medical expenses. Due to the injuries sustained in the accident, he has suffered from permanent disability. With these reasons, the claimant has prayed for awar
The insurer is liable to pay third-party compensation despite driver non-compliance with licensing, as established in prior rulings.
The grace period for driving license validity under Section 14 legitimizes liability of insurers, impacting judgments on compensation and negligence in vehicular accidents.
Under the Motor Vehicles Act, non-compliance with license conditions does not absolve insurers of third-party liability; pay and recovery principle applies to recover claims from vehicle owners.
The court affirmed that the vehicle owner's liability is not negated by the driver's lack of a specific endorsement on his license, aligning with recent apex court decisions.
Insurers remain liable for compensation to third parties despite violations of policy terms and may recover payments from vehicle owners.
Compensation for personal injury must adequately reflect the severity of injuries and associated suffering, with the finding of primary negligence resting on the lorry driver.
The court ruled that the insurance company must pay compensation despite the driver's alleged lack of a valid license, as the Tribunal's reasoning was found to be erroneous.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
