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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 19685

KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
M/S TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD – Appellant
Versus
SRI B M SATISH – Respondent
MFA 7857 / 2017



HC-KAR IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 7857 OF 2017 (MV-D)

C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 2072 OF 2018 (MV-I)

IN MFA No. 7857/2017 BETWEEN:

M/S TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD

3RD FLOOR, JP & DEVI JAMBUKESWAR ARCADE, NO.69,MILLERS ROAD, BANGALORE-560 052 REPRESENTED BY REGIONAL CLAIMS MANAGER …APPELLANT (BY SRI. RAVI S SAMPRATHI.,ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed by 1. SRI B M SATISH NIRMALA S/O LATE MALLIKARJUNAIAH, DEVI AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS Location:

HIGH

2. SMT K S CHANDRAKALA COURT OF KARNATAKA W/O B M SATISH, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS 3. KUM A S PAVITHRA D/O B M SATISH, AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS ALL R/AT NO.162,3RD MAIN, 3RD CROSS, ANJANEYA TEMPLE ROAD, LAKSHMIDEVINAGAR, NANDINI LAYOUT, HC-KAR BANGALORE-560096

4. SRI ASHOK KUMAR MADAN S/O BRIJ MOHAN, MAJOR IN AGE, NO.AG-458,SANJAY GANDHI TPT NAGAR, NORTH DELHI-110 042 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B M CHANDRASHEKARA, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3 NOTICE TO R4 IS HELD SUFFICIENT V/O DTD 22.11.2023)

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 26.07.2017 PASSED IN MVC NO.5893/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE X ADDITIONAL JUDGE, MACT, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU, (SCCH-16), AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.8,27,300/- WITH INTEREST @ 9% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION AND ETC.

IN MFA NO. 2072/2018 BETWEEN:

M/S TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD

3RD FLOOR, JP & DEVI JAMBUKESWAR ARCADE, NO.69, MILLERS ROAD, BANGALORE-560052 REPRESENTED BY REGIONAL CLAIMS MANAGER.

...APPELLANT (BY SRI. RAVI S SAMPRATHI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. SRI D FRANCIS ZAVIER S/O AYANIYEL @ DANIEL, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, R/O KT NO.332, 14TH CROSS, ST.THOMAS ROAD, KEB COLONY, MANDYA CITY-571401

2. SRI ASHOK KUMAR MADAN S/O BRIJ MOHAN, MAJOR IN AGE, NO.AG-458, SANJAY GANDHI TPT NAGAR, HC-KAR NORTH DELHI-110042 ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. HARSHA V, ADVOCATE FOR R1 NOTICE TO R2 IS HELD SUFFICIENT V/O DTD 22.11.2023)

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 19.10.2017 PASSED IN MVC NO.1117/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, MANDYA, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.2,98,469/- ALONG WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 9%

FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION AND ETC.

THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA

ORAL JUDGMENT

MFA No.7857/2017 is filed by the insurer calling in question the judgment and award dated 26.7.2017 passed in MVC No.5893/2013 by the court of Small Causes and Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru (SCCH-16), [Hereinafter referred to as ‘Tribunal-Bengaluru’]. MFA No.2072/2018 is filed by the insurer calling in question the judgment and award dated 19.10.2017 passed in MVC No.1117/2013 by the I Additional Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Mandya, [Hereinafter referred to as ‘Tribunal-Mandya’]

2. Both the claim petitions in MVC No.5893/2013 and MVC No.1117/2013 were filed claiming compensation due to HC-KAR the same accident dated 19.7.2013, involving the same insured lorry. Hence, both the appeals are taken up together for consideration.

3. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred as per their rank before the Tribunal.

4. MVC No.5893/2013 has been filed by the legal representatives of one Guruvanth, [Hereinafter referred to as ‘deceased’]. It is the case of the claimants that when the deceased was traveling as a pillion rider of a motor cycle, a lorry hit the said motorcycle causing the accident in question. The owner and insurer of the lorry were arrayed as respondent Nos.1 and 2 before the Tribunal- Bengaluru. The owner of the lorry remained ex parte and did not contest the claim proceedings. The insurer contested the claim proceedings by filing its statement of objections. The Tribunal-Bengaluru, by its judgment and award dated 26.7.2017, partly allowed the claim petition and awarded a total compensation of `8,27,300

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top