IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL

WRIT PETITION NO. 58156 OF 2018 (GM-AC)

BETWEEN:

SRI M R VIJAYA KUMAR

SON OF M.T. RAJASHEKARAIAH

AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,

MUNICIPALITY CONTRACTOR,

RESIDENT OF BESIDE KGID BUILDING,

HOLALKERE ROAD,

CHITRADURGA - 577 501.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. N.R. RANGE GOWDA.,ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. SMT. RADHAMMA

WIFE OF LATE RANGANATHA

AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS

Digitally signed

by SUMA B N 2. KUM. R. ANITHA

Location: HIGH D/O LATE RANGANATHA

COURT OF

AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS

KARNATAKA

3. SRI. SATHYAVELU

SON OF LATE RANGANATHA

AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS

4. R. VINOD KUMAR

SON OF LATE RANGANATHA

AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS

RESPONDENT NOS.1 TO 4 ARE ALL

R/AT NO.125, ASHRAYA YOJANE

FIRST LAYOUT, KAVADIGARAHATTI VILLAGE, CHITRADURGA TALUK & DISTRICT - 577 501.

5. SMT. GOWRAMMA WIFE OF LATE HANUMANTHAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS OWNER OF TRACTOR-TRAILER BEARING NO.KA-16-2453-2454.

RESIDENT OF NEHRUNAGAR, NEHRU NAGAR, HOLALKERE ROAD, CHITRADURGA - 577 501. 6. THE COMMISSIONER CHITRADURGA MUNICIPALITY OFFICE OF TOWN MUNICIPALITY, CHITRADURGA - 577 501.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. R. SHASHIDHARA.,ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R4;

SRI. S. MAHESH., ADVOCATE FOR R6;

R5- SERVED)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 14.11.2018 PASSED BY THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM AT CHITRADURGA, IN MVC NO.278/2017 ON I.A.NO.2 FILED BY R-1 AT ANNEXURE-J, AND FURTHER BE PLEASED TO QUASH/DISMISS THE CLAIM PETITION IN MVC NO.278/2017 PENDING ON THE FILE OF PRL. SRNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM AT CHITRADURGA BY ALLOWING APPLICATION FILED BY THE R-1 UNDER SECTION

53 OF ESI ACT, AS PER ANNEXURE-F AND ETC.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL

ORAL ORDER

Present petition is filed being aggrieved by the order dated 14.11.2018 passed in MVC No.278/2017 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Chitradurga (hereinafter referred to as Tribunal) by which the application filed by the petitioner under Section 53 of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 ('ESI Act' for short) r/w Section 151 of CPC has been rejected.

2. Respondents No.1 to 4 herein being the legal representatives of one Ranganath who was the erstwhile employee of the petitioner herein have filed the above petition in MVC No.278/2017 under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, ('MV Act' for short) seeking compensation in view of his death stated to have been caused on account of a road traffic accident that had occurred on 25.09.2012 involving a tractor trailer bearing Registration No.KA-16, 2453-54 which belonged to respondent No.5 herein. An application under Section 53 of the ESI Act came to be filed by the petitioner herein seeking dismissal of the said petition on the premise that the respondents No.1 to 4 were legal representatives of said deceased Ranganath were paid compensation/amount under the provisions of ESI Act. It is contented that since the respondents No.1 to 4 being the legal representatives of the deceased Ranganath have already been paid/compensated, filing of petition under Section 166 of MV Act by them is barred under Section 53 of the ESI Act. Therefore, petitioner has sought for dismissal of the said petition.

3. By the impugned order Tribunal negated the said contention and consequently rejected the application. Being aggrieved by the same, petitioner is before this Court.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner reiterating the grounds urged in the memorandum of petition, submitted that the Tribunal has not adverted to the provisions of Section 53 of the ESI Act in its proper perspective which clearly bars an application to be filed under any other provisions of law if the compensation was already paid under the ESI Act. He submits since there is an express bar provided under Section 53, the Tribunal ought not to have rejected the application giving rise to the