Back
2022 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 40771
- 1 -
MFA No. 1282 of 2012
C/W MFA No.1283 of 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1282 OF 2012 (MV-I)
C/W
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.1283 OF 2012 (MV 3I)
IN M.F.A.No.1282/2012
BETWEEN:
SRI. P. DORESWAMY,
S/O LATE PUTTASWAMAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
R/AT VAJAMANAGALA VILLAGE,
VARUNA HOBLI,
MYSORE TALUK AND DISTRICT.
&APPELLANT
(BY SRI. H. V. BHANUPRAKASH.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
H.S.NAGARAJU,
S/O SHANKARACHARI,
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
R/AT NO.42, MARIGUDI ROAD,
YARAGNAHALLI,
MYSORE.
(DRIVER OF GOODS AUTO
BEARING NO.KA.55/96)
2.
S.R.PRAFULLA,
W/O K. VASU,
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS,
Digitally
signed by
PANKAJA S
Location:
High Court of
Karnataka
- 2 -
MFA No. 1282 of 2012
C/W MFA No.1283 of 2012
R/AT NO.18, FIRST CROSS,
RAGHAVENDRA NAGAR,
MYSORE.
(OWNER OF GOODS AUTO
BEARING NO.KA.55/96)
3.
THE DIVISIONAL MANGER,
CHOLAMANDALAM M/S GENERAL INSURANCE
COMPANY LIMITED,
HEAD OFFICE <DARE HOUSE=,
SECOND FLOOR,
CHENNAI.
(POLICY NO.3379/00305895/000/00
VALID FROM 29-11-2008 TO 28-11-2009)
&RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.O.MAHESH, ADVOCATE FOR R3;
R1 AND R2 SERVED)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 14.06.2011 PASSED IN MVC
NO.299/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE PRESIDING OFFICER, FAST
TRACK COURT-IV, ADDITIONAL MACT, MYSORE, PARTLY
ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND
SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
IN M.F.A.No.1283/2012
BETWEEN:
1.
SRI.KEERTHI KUMAR,
S/O P.DORESWAMY,
AGED ABOUT 17 YEARS,
R/AT VAJAMANAGALA VILLAGE,
VARUNA HOBLI,
MYSORE TALUK AND DISTRICT.
SINCE MINOR
REPRESENTED BY HIS
- 3 -
MFA No. 1282 of 2012
C/W MFA No.1283 of 2012
FATHER HAS A NATURAL GUARDIAN,
P.DORESWAMY,
S/O LATE PUTTASWAMAIAH,
&APPELLANT
(BY SRI. H. V. BHANUPRAKASH., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
H.S.NAGARAJU,
S/O SHANKARACHARI,
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
R/AT NO.42, MARIGUDI ROAD, YARAGNAHALLI,
MYSORE.
(DRIVER OF GOODS AUTO
BEARING NO.KA.55/96)
2.
S.R.PRAFULLA,
W/O K. VASU,
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS,
R/AT NO.18, FIRST CROSS,
RAGHAVENDRA NAGAR,
MYSORE.
(OWNER OF GOODS AUTO
BEARING NO.KA.55/96)
3.
THE DIVISIONAL MANGER,
CHOLAMANDALAM M/S GENERAL INSURANCE
COMPANY LIMITED,
HEAD OFFICE <DARE HOUSE=,
SECOND FLOOR,
CHENNAIAH.
(POLICY NO.3379/00305895/000/00
VALID FROM 29-11-2008 TO 28-11-2009)
&RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.O.MAHESH, ADVOCATE FOR R3;
R1 AND R2 SERVED)
- 4 -
MFA No. 1282 of 2012
C/W MFA No.1283 of 2012
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 14.06.2011 PASSED IN MVC
NO.297/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE PRESIDING OFFICER, FAST
TRACK COURT-IV, ADDITIONAL MACT, MYSORE, PARTLY
ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND
SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THESE APPEALS COMING ON HEARING THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
The claimants are in appeal seeking for enhancement
of
compensation.
They
are
also
challenging
the
exoneration of the insurer to pay the compensation.
The Tribunal has exonerated the liability of the
insurer on the ground that the first respondent possessed
only a Learners Licence and he did not hold a valid and
effective driving licence as on the date of the accident. It
was also recorded by the Tribunal that the driver did not
possess the Learners Licence to drive the transport vehicle
and therefore, the insurer would not be liable.
It is settled law that if the insurer were to plead that
the person driving the vehicle did not have a valid and
effective driving licence which amounted to a breach of
- 5 -
policy condition, the only option available to the insurer
would be to pay the compensation and thereafter, proceed
to recover the same from the owner of the offending
vehicle.
4.
In view of this settled principle of law, the
exoneration of the insurer of the liability to pay the
compensation will have to be set-aside. It is hereby held
that the insurer would be liable to pay the compensation
to the claimants and thereafter, proceed to recover the
same from the owner of the offending vehicle.
5.
The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.2,90,000/-
and a sum of Rs.88,000/- for the injuries suffered by the
claimants.
6.
Having regard to the fact that the treated doctor was
not examined and for the injuries suffered by the
claimants, the sums awarded by the Tribunal towards 'pain
and agony', 'medical expenses' and 'loss of income during
- 6 -
the medical treatment' are just and proper and do not call
for any interference.
7.
Consequently, the appeals are allowed to the extent
of holding that the insurer would be liable to pay the
compensation and thereafter, proceed to recover the same
from the owner of the offending vehicle. The compensation
awarded by the Tribunal is affirmed.
8.
The claimants are not entitled to interest for the
delayed period in filing this appeal.
SD/-
JUDGE
GH
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 35
