IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.3369 OF 2019(MV-I)

BETWEEN:

THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, M./S RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., REGISTERED OFFICE NO.19, HITACHAND MARG, BALLARD ESTATE, MUMBAI, NO.REP BY ITS MANAGER, M/S.RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., NO.28, 5^TH FLOOR, EAST WING, CENTENARY BUILDING, M.G. ROAD, BANGALORE-560 045.

… APPELLANT (BY SRI. D.VIJAYA KUMAR., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. DODDISIDDASHETTY S/O BASAVASHETTY, NOW AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/A EKKADAHALLI VILLAGE, KOLLEGAL TALUK, CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT-571 111.

2. KRISHNA S/O SIDDEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/O KOLIPALYA, MALAVALLI TOWN, MANDYA DISTRICT-571 605. (DRIVER OF TAYOTA QUALIS REG NO.KA-19-MB-8118).

3. SMT. INDRA W/O ANANDA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/O NO.15/E, KALASIPALYA, NEAR SWARNA TRANSPORTS, BANGALORE-560 018.

(OWNER OF TATOTA QUALIS, REG NO.KA-19-MB-8118).

4. RAVI S/O RAJANNA, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/O NO.65/02, GANIGARAPALYA, BANASHANKARI, KANAKAPURA ROAD, BANGALORE-560 062 … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. GURUDATH.B.S., ADVOCATE FOR R1;

V/O DTD:23.10.2025, NOTICE TO R2 TO R4 IS DISPENSED WITH)

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 28.09.2018, PASSED IN MVC NO.39/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHAMARAJANAGAR, (SITTING KOLLEGAL) AND M.A.C.T., AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.2,22,783/- PETITIONER SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED FOR INTEREST BY VIRTUE OF ORDER DATED: 16.04.2016 DURING THE PERIOD OF DISMISSAL AND RESTORATION OF THE PETITION I.E., FROM 10.01.2013 TO 16.04.2016. HOWEVER, THE PETITIONER SHALL BE ENTITLED FOR INTEREST AT 6 PERCENT P.A. FROM 16.04.2016 UNTIL REALIZATION OF AMOUNT AT 6 PERCENT P.A.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU

ORAL JUDGMENT

1. The present appeal seeks to challenge an Impugned Judgment and Award dated 28.09.2018 passed in MVC No.39/2010 by the learned Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Chamarajanagar (hereinafter referred as “Impugned Award”). By the Impugned Award, the claim petition filed by Respondent No.1 has been allowed and compensation in a sum of Rs.2,22,783/- has been granted along with 6%

interest.

2. The learned counsel for the appellant has raised two grounds of challenge. Firstly, he contends that even though the learned Trial Court found that there was no valid driving licence, the pay and recovery order was not granted. Secondly, it is contended that the compensation awarded was calculated taking notional income at the rate of Rs.6,000/- p.m. and since the accident occurred in the year

2009, the notional income was Rs.5,000/-p.m.

3. The learned counsel for Respondent No.1 submits that the issue of not having a driving licence was raised by the Insurance Company before the learned Trial Court as well. However, he fairly submits that the orders for pay and recovery were not granted to the appellant/Insurance Company.

4. The brief facts are that, on 22.06.2009 the respondent/claimant while transporting wooden logs on his bullock cart was enroute Hondarabalu. At around 6:00 a.m. in the morning, a Tata Qualis bearing Registration No. KA- 19-MB-8118 driven by Respondent No.2 hit the bullock cart and the respondent/claimant from the rear side. Because of this accident, the respondent/claimant fell down from the bullock cart and sustained injuries all over his body and the bullock cart was also damaged. The respondent/claimant was hospitalized for his injuries and took treatment as an inpatient for approximately ten days and sustained fracture of right side of the ribs, spinal cord and back. A complaint was registered against Respondent No.2/owner and driver of the vehicle in Crime No.135/2009. The respondent/claimant filed a claim petition before the learned Tribunal seeking compensation for his injuries. Notices were issued to the driver, owner of th