IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 4479 OF 2020 (MV-I)

BETWEEN:

THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., 1ST FLOOR, JAGALUR MAHALINGAPA TOWERS DAVANAGERE ROAD, CHITRADURGA AND ALSO AT THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, SHUBHARAM COMPLEX, NO.144, M.G. ROAD BANGALORE - 560 025, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER.

…APPELLANT (BY SRI. SRIDHARA K, ADVOCATE AND Digitally signed SRI. S.S. PANDIT, ADVOCATE)

by SHARADAVANI B AND:

Location: High Court of Karnataka

1. SRI RUDRAPPA @ RUDRESHA AGED 42 YEARS, S/O CHANNABASAPPA AGRICULTURIST AND COOLIE R/O KALKERE VILLAGE, HOLAKRE TALUK CHITRADURGA DISTRICT.

2. A.H. RAMESHA S/O HALAPPA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/O KALKERE VILLAGE HOLALKERE TALUK CHITRADURGA DISTRICT.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. HARISH N.R, ADVOCATE FOR R1;

R2 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 20.03.2020 PASSED IN MVC NO.795/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MACT, HOLALKERE, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.1,45,153/- WITH INTEREST AT 6 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL DEPOSIT.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA

ORAL JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the respondent No.2-insurer being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 20^th March 2020, passed by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, MACT, Holalkere, (for short `Tribunal'), in MVC No.795/2018.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Tribunal.

3. The brief facts of the case are that respondent No.1 herein filed MVC No.795/2018, contending that on 23.01.2014, at about 6:45 pm, he was going on a motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-16/U-1060 and his brother was riding the said vehicle. When the said vehicle reached near Narashetty Hall bridge, NH-13 road, the rider of the vehicle rode the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and hit against tractor- trailer, which was parked beside the road. As a consequence, the petitioner fell down and sustained injuries on his abdomen and legs. Later, his right leg was amputated. Immediately after the incident, the petitioner was taken to Government Hospital, Channagiri and thereafter, he was shifted to Bapuji Hospital, Davanagere, wherein he was admitted as an inpatient from 23.01.2014 to 10.02.2014. He has suffered permanent disability and has spent substantial amount towards his treatment. With these reasons, he prayed to award compensation of Rs.15,00,000/-.

4. Respondent No.2 (appellant herein) filed a written statement denying contents of the claim petition and further contended that its liability is restricted to the terms and conditions of policy of insurance. With these reasons, prayed to dismiss the claim petition.

5. From the rival contentions of the parties, the Tribunal framed necessary issues.

6. The claimant to prove his case examined one witness as PW-1 and marked 11 documents, as per Exs.P-1 to P-11. Respondents examined two witnesses as RW-1 and RW-2 and marked documents as Exs.R-1 to R-3.

7. The Tribunal, after hearing both the parties by the impugned judgment and award, partly allowed the petition, directing the respondents to pay the compensation of Rs.1,45,153/-. The Tribunal held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent riding of the motorcycle by its rider. 8. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and award, the insurer preferred this appeal.

9. I have heard the arguments of learned counsel for the appellant and respondent No.1.

10. Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently contends that the said vehicle was falsely implicated in the accident. The claimant had not sustained injuries in any vehicle accident but just to claim the compensation, in collusion with police as well as owner of the vehicle, has filed a false complaint about 9 days after the