RESERVED ON : 31.10.2025 PRONOUNCED ON : 14.01.2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14^th DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.5691 OF 2016 (MV-I)

BETWEEN:

SMT. NAGARATHNA, W/O N. MANJEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.319, 2^ND CROSS, RABIN THEATER, KENGERI UPANAGARA, BANGALORE – 560 060.

…APPELLANT (BY SRI. NARESH KUMAR J., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. BHARATHI INTERNATIONAL TRANSPORT, NO.576, DEVANS ROAD, LAKSHMIPURAM, MYSORE.

2. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO., LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, 5^TH FLOOR, KRUSHI BHAVANA, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, HUDSON CIRCLE, BANGALORE – 560 027.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. LAKSHMI NARASAPPA K.S., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. A.M. VENKATESH, ADVOCATE FOR R2;

R1 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLE ACT

1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD OF DISMISSAL DATED 30.11.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.2879/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE 1^ST ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE & 27^TH ACMM, BENGALURU, BY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION AS PRAYED IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

THIS APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED AND COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT THIS DAY, T.M.NADAF, J., PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF

CAV JUDGMENT

This appeal is by unsuccessful claimant calling in question judgment and award dated 30.11.2015 in MVC No.2879/2014 passed by the Motor Accident claims Tribunal (SCCH-11), (‘the Tribunal’ for short).

2. The parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Tribunal.

3. The claimant was proceeding as a pillion on motorcycle bearing No.KA-41-S-0430 along with the rider of the owner, on 16.05.2014 at about 08.00 p.m. When they reached near Anchepalya in front of Rajarajeshwari Hospital, at that point of time, a car bearing No.KA-09-B-9916 being driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner, endangering human life, dashed against the motorcycle resulting in severe injures to the claimant. The claimant was immediately shifted to Rajarajeshwari Medical College and Hospital and she was admitted as inpatient from 16.05.2014 to 28.05.2014. In the hospital it was revealed that she had sustained fracture of right humerus in junction of middle 1/3^rd and distal 1/3^rd and other grievous injuries. She had undergone open reduction for internal fixation with LCP right humerus on 19.05.2014 and discharged with advice of follow-up treatment.

4. The claimant prior to the accident was doing tailoring work and earning Rs.15,000/- per month and maintaining her family. In view of injury suffered, which has resulted in disability, her earning is shortened and she is not in a position to earn as she could do earlier.

5. Upon service of notice respondent No.1 appeared through counsel but not filed written statement. Respondent No.2-Insurer appeared through its counsel and filed written statement denying the claim averments and taking up contentions that the driver of the car was not holding a valid and effective driving license as on the date of accident and the Insurance Company is not liable to pay any compensation.

6. The Tribunal upon completion of pleadings framed three issues, and the first issue is on the rash and negligent driving by the driver of the car.

7. The claimant in order to prove his case examined as PW.1 and two witnesses as PW.2 and PW.3 (Dr.Roshan Kumar.B), produced 27 documents and marked the same as Exs.P1 to P27. Respondent No.2/Insurer has not chosen to lead any evidence.

8. The Tribunal upon considering the pleading and evidence both oral and documentary answered issue No.1 i.e., on the fact of rash and negligent driving by the driver of the car, in negative and proceeded to dismiss the claim petition.

9. The main reason for the Tribunal to dismiss the petition is the delay in lodging the complaint. The Tribunal has observed that the accident had occurred on 16.05.2014 at about 08.00 p.m. and the FIR was registered on 24.05.2014 at about 05.30 p.m. The rider of the motorcycle is the brother of the p