Back
2023 Supreme(Online)(KAR) 16674
- 1 -
MFA No. 200621 of 2020
C/W MFA No. 200618 of 2020
MFA No. 200619 of 2020
MFA No. 200620 of 2020
MFA No. 200622 of 2020
MFA No. 200623 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF APRIL, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.200621/2020 (MV-I)
C/W
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.200618/2020 (MV-D),
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.200619/2020(MV-D),
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.200620/2020 (MV-D),
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.200622/2020 (MV-D),
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.200623/2020 (MV-I)
MFA NO.200621/2020:
BETWEEN:
SULTANBI @ SATTARBI
W/O ABDULRAZAK HAKEEM
AGED ABOUT: 69 YEARS
OCC: CLOTH BUSINESS R/O PAILWAN GALLI
NEAR HAKEEN CHOUK
VIJAYAPUR-586101
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI SANGANAGOUDA V. BIRADAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
SRI. RAJU
S/O AMASIDDA KAMBLE
AGED ABOUT: 45 YEARS
OCC: BUSINESS, R/O TORAVI
TQ. & DIST. VIJAYAPUR-586101
2.
THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER
THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
SANGAM BUILDING S.S. FRONT ROAD,
VIJAYAPUR-586101
…RESPONDENTS
Digitally signed
by RAMESH
MATHAPATI
Location: High
Court of
Karnataka
- 2 -
MFA No. 200621 of 2020
C/W MFA No. 200618 of 2020
MFA No. 200619 of 2020
MFA No. 200620 of 2020
MFA No. 200622 of 2020
MFA No. 200623 of 2020
(BY SRI SUDARSHAN M., ADVOCATE FOR R2;
R1-SERVED)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S. 173(1) OF MV ACT PRAYING TO
TO, ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION AMOUNT AND FURTHER
HOLD THE 2ND RESPONDENT INSURANCE COMPANY LIABLE TO
SATISFY THE AWARD AMOUNT BY SUITABLY MODIFYING THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 06.08.2019 PASSED BY THE
HON'BLE III ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT-XII,
VIJAYAPUR IN MVC NO.1828/2016.
MFA NO.200618/2020:
BETWEEN:
1.
USMANKHAN
S/O SHIRAJKHAN HAKEEM,
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
OCC: BUSINESS,
2.
BATULBAI
W/O SHABBIRKHAN HAKEEM
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,
OCC: HOUSE HOLD,
3.
RIZWAN
W/O CHITTAWALI HAKEEM
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
OCC: HOUSE HOLD,
APPELLANTS ARE ALL R/O: NEAR
HAKEEM CHOUK, VIJAYAPUR-586101.
…APPELLANTS
(BY SRI SANGANAGOUDA V. BIRADAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
SRI. RAJU
S/O AMASIDDA KAMBLE,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: TORAVI,
TQ. AND DIST. VIJAYAPUR-586101.
- 3 -
MFA No. 200621 of 2020
C/W MFA No. 200618 of 2020
MFA No. 200619 of 2020
MFA No. 200620 of 2020
MFA No. 200622 of 2020
MFA No. 200623 of 2020
2.
THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER
THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
SANGAM BUILDING, S.S. FRONT ROAD,
VIJAYAPURA-586101.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SUDARSHAN M., ADVOCATE FOR R2;
R1-SERVED)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173 (1) OF M.V. ACT PRAYING TO
ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION AMOUNT AND FURTHER HOLD
THE 2ND RESPONDENT INSURANCE COMPANY LIABLE TO
SATISFY THE AWARD AMOUNT BY SUITABLY MODIFYING THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 06.08.2019 PASSED BY THE
HON'BLE III ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT-XII,
VIJAYAPUR IN MVC NO.1822/2016.
MFA NO.200619/2020:
BETWEEN:
SHAHIDA
W/O RASHIDKHIN HAKEEM
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE,
R/O PAILWAN GALLI, NEAR HAKEEN CHOUK,
VIJAYAPURA-586101.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI SANGANAGOUDA V. BIRADAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
SRI. RAJU
S/O AMASIDDA KAMBLE,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O TORAVI, TQ. & DIST.
VIJAYAPURA-586101.
2.
THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER
THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
- 4 -
MFA No. 200621 of 2020
C/W MFA No. 200618 of 2020
MFA No. 200619 of 2020
MFA No. 200620 of 2020
MFA No. 200622 of 2020
MFA No. 200623 of 2020
SANGAM BUILDING, S.S. FRONT ROAD,
VIJAYAPURA-586101.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SUDARSHAN M., ADVOCATE FOR R2;
R1-SERVED)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S. 173(1) OF MV ACT PRAYING TO
ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION AMOUNT AND FURTHER HOLD
THE 2ND RESPONDENT INSURANCE COMPANY LIABLE TO
SATISFY THE AWARD AMOUNT BY SUITABLY MODIFYING THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 06.08.2019 PASSED BY THE
HON'BLE III ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT -XII,
VIJAYPUR IN MVC NO. 1823/2016.
MFA NO.200620/2020
BETWEEN:
1.
MOHAMMED SARWAR
S/O ABDUL RAHEMAN HAKEEM
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
OCC: TAILORING WORK
R/O PAILWAN GALLI NEAR
HAKEEN CHOUK
VIJAYAPUR-586101
2.
MOHAMMED HUSIN
S/O ABDUL RAHEMAN HAKEEM
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
OCC: BUSINESS R/O PAILWAN
GALLI NEAR HAKEEN CHOUK
VIJAYAPUR-586101
3.
MURTUZA HUSAIN
S/O ABDUL RAHEMAN HAKEEM
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS
OCC: BUSINESS R/O PAILWAN
GALLI NEAR HAKEEN CHOUK
VIJAYAPUR-586101
- 5 -
MFA No. 200621 of 2020
C/W MFA No. 200618 of 2020
MFA No. 200619 of 2020
MFA No. 200620 of 2020
MFA No. 200622 of 2020
MFA No. 200623 of 2020
4.
SHAMEEMNNISA
W/O MOHAMMED RAFIQ HAKEEM
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
OCC: HOUSEHOLD
R/O KUDACHI TQ.RAIBAG
DIST.BELGAVI
…APPELLANTS
(BY SRI SANGANAGOUDA V. BIRADAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
SRI. RAJU
S/O AMASIDDA KAMBLE
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
OCC: BUSINESS R/O TORAVI
TQ. & DIST. VIJAYAPUR-586101
2.
THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER
THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
SANGAM BUILDING S.S. FRONT ROAD,
VIJAYAPUR-586101
RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SUDARSHAN M., ADVOCATE FOR R2;
R1-SERVED)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S. 173(1) OF MV ACT PRAYING TO
ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION AMOUNT AND FURTHER HOLD
THE 2ND RESPONDENT INSURANCE COMPANY LIABLE TO
SATISFY THE AWARD AMOUNT BY SUITABLY MODIFYING THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 06.08.2019 PASSED BY THE
HON'BLE III ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT -XII,
VIJAYPUR IN MVC NO. 1825/2016.
MFA NO.200622/2020:
BETWEEN:
1.
MD. AKRAM MUSASAB DKHANI
AGED ABOUT: 44 YEARS,
OCC: BUSINESS,
- 6 -
MFA No. 200621 of 2020
C/W MFA No. 200618 of 2020
MFA No. 200619 of 2020
MFA No. 200620 of 2020
MFA No. 200622 of 2020
MFA No. 200623 of 2020
2.
RUKHIYA BANU
W/O AKRAM DAKHANI
AGED ABOUT: 39 YEARS,
OCC: HOUSE HOLD,
BOTH ARE R/O SURPUR,
DIST. YADGIR.
…APPELLANTS
(BY SRI SANGANAGOUDA V. BIRADAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
SRI. RAJU
S/O AMASIDDA KAMBLE,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
OCC: BUSINESS, R/O TORAVI,
TQ. & DIST. VIJAYAPURA-586101.
2.
THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER
THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
SANGAM BUILDING, S.S. FRONT ROAD,
VIJAYAPURA-586101.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SUDARSHAN M., ADVOCATE FOR R2;
R1-SERVED)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S. 173(1) OF MV ACT PRAYING TO
ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION AMOUNT AND FURTHER HOLD
THE 2ND RESPONDENT INSURANCE COMPANY LIABLE TO
SATISFY THE AWARD AMOUNT BY SUITABLY MODIFYING THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 06.08.2019 PASSED BY THE
HONOURABLE III ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT-XII,
VIJAYAPUR IN MVC NO.1829/2016.
MFA NO.200623/2020:
BETWEEN:
HASHIMBI
W/O MOHAMMED SARAWAR HAKEEM
- 7 -
MFA No. 200621 of 2020
C/W MFA No. 200618 of 2020
MFA No. 200619 of 2020
MFA No. 200620 of 2020
MFA No. 200622 of 2020
MFA No. 200623 of 2020
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
OCC: TAILORING WORK,
R/O PAILWAN GALLI, NEAR HAKEEN CHOUK,
VIJAYAPURA-586101.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI SANGANAGOUDA V. BIRADAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
SRI. RAJU
S/O AMASIDDA KAMBLE,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. TORAVI,
TQ. AND DIST. VIJAYAPURA-586101.
2.
THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER
THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
SANGAM BUILDING, S.S. FRONT ROAD,
VIJAYAPURA-586101.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SUDARSHAN M., ADVOCATE FOR R2;
R1-SERVED)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S. 173(1) OF MV ACT PRAYING TO
ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION AMOUNT AND FURTHER HOLD
THE 2ND RESPONDENT INSURANCE COMPANY LIABLE TO
SATISFY THE AWARD AMOUNT BY SUITABLY MODIFYING THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 06.08.2019 PASSED BY THE
HON'BLE III ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT-XII,
VIJAYPUR IN MVC NO.1831/2016.
THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
- 8 -
MFA No. 200621 of 2020
C/W MFA No. 200618 of 2020
MFA No. 200619 of 2020
MFA No. 200620 of 2020
MFA No. 200622 of 2020
MFA No. 200623 of 2020
In all the 6 cases the appellants/claimants have filed
these appeals for enhancement of compensation and also
to fix the liability on the insurance company.
Though matters are listed for admission, with
the consent of learned counsel for both parties, they are
taken up for final disposal.
Learned
counsel
for
the
appellants
has
submitted his arguments that in all these cases the
Tribunal has not passed the judgment and award in
accordance with law. Same is not just and proper and
sought for enhancement of compensation.
With regard to the liability of the insurance
company is concerned, it is submitted that the Tribunal
has dismissed the case against the insurance company on
the ground that owner of the offending vehicle has
violated the terms and conditions of the policy. If this
- 9 -
Court were to come to the conclusion that there is a
violation of terms and conditions of the policy, it can pass
an order directing the insurance company to pay the
amount with liberty to recover the same from the owner of
the offending vehicle. To substantiate his arguments he
relied upon the decision of Full Bench of this Court in the
case of NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., BIJAPUR v.
YALLAVVA AND ANOTHER reported in (2020) 2 KCCR
1405.
5.
As against this, learned counsel for the
respondent-insurance company in all the cases has
submitted that the judgment passed by the Tribunal is in
accordance with law. That there are no grounds to
interfere with the impugned judgment and award passed
by the Tribunal. On all these grounds sought for dismissal
of this appeal.
- 10 -
6.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of
the case, the following points would arise for my
consideration:
(1)
Whether
the
appellants
in
MFA
Nos.200621/2020,
200618/2020,
200619/2020, 200620/2020 and 200623/2020
are entitled for enhancement of compensation
as sought for?
(2)
Whether the appellants in MFA No.200622/2020
are entitled for enhancement of compensation
as sought for?
(3)
Whether the respondent-insurance company is
liable to pay the compensation in view of
decision of Full Bench of this Court (referred
supra)?
(4)
What order/award?
7.
My answer to the above points are:
(1)
Partly affirmative
- 11 -
(2)
Negative
(3)
Affirmative
(4)
As per final order
RE. POINT NO.1:
(1)
8.
This appeal is arising out of MVC No.1828/2016.
In para 31 of the impugned judgment the Tribunal has
observed as under:
"31. According to petitioner, who examined as
PW5, testified that, she was doing cloth business
thereby earning Rs.15,000/-. Further testified
that, due to accident, she sustained injury to chin,
head and sternum and other injuries all over body
and as such admitted to District Hospital Vijaypur
and private Hospital for treatment and took
treatment. She has became permanently disabled
and unable to do any work as earlier. She spent
more than Rs.50,000/- towards medical and other
expenses. The petitioner has produced Wound
Certificate at Ex.P16, wherein it is shown CLW
over chin, contusion with haematams, tenderness
over stenum and the doctor opined that, the said
injuries are simple in nature. On perusal of this
document, the age of petitioner is shown as 70
years. In order to corroborate the oral testimony
of P.W.5 and also assess the disability suffered by
the petitioner, no registered medical practitioner
has been examined and no such disability
certificate has been produced. The petitioner
contends that, she has taken treatment at Govt.
Hospital Vijaypur and other private hospital and
just produced Inpatient bill at Ex.P-17 amounting
to Rs.6,000/- and date of admission is mentioned
- 12 -
as 30-05-2016 and discharged on 04-06-2016
i.e., 4 days she was inpatient. Though the
petitioner has contended that she has sustained
permanent
disability
and
that
she
became
permanently
disabled.
To
substantiate
this
contention the petitioner neither has led the
evidence of any doctor nor produced any disability
certificate. In the absence of such evidence,
l
