IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 25^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.103075 OF 2019 (MV-D)

BETWEEN:

THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, KIRLOSAK ROAD, BELAGAVI-590020.

(INSURER OF TRUCK NO.KA-51/B-9066, POLICY: NO.423000/31/2017/1730 VALID FROM: 07/06/2016 TO 06/06/2017)

REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY.

…APPELLANT (BY SRI GN RAICHUR, ADVOCATE (VC))

AND:

1. KHADIRSAB NABISAB BAGAWAN AGE. 72 YEARS, OCC. NIL, CHANDRASHEKAR R/O GOKAK, TQ. GOKAK, LAXMAN KATTIMANI DIST. BELAGAVI-591307.

DCLAHig XAit MNal ADy NR s AK igSA nHT eET dKI M bAy ARNI LKD+ oaa0 crt1ena 0: ta 0 i 2toa0 nk2 :a 6 H, .D0 ig 4hh .a0 Cr2wo 0 ua6 rdt : 2 Bo 3ef :n4c1h SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS RESPONDENT NO.2 & 3 ALREADY ON RECORD

2. SMT.AMMAJKAN W/O KHADIRSAB BAGAWAN, AGE 67 YEARS, OCC. NIL, R/O GOKAK, TQ. GOKAK, DIST. GOKAK, DIST. BELAGAVI-591307.

3. DILSHAD D/O KHADIRSAB BAGAWAN, AGE. 35 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD, R/O GOKAK, TQ. GOKAK, DIST. BELAGAVI-591307.

4. RAVI M S/O MUNISWAMY, AGE. MAJOR, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O 903, 13^TH MAIN, 7^TH CROSS, SRINIVAS NAGAR, SBM COLONY BSK

1^ST STAGE, BANGALORE-560050.

(OWNER OF TRUCK NO.KA-51/B-9066 POLICY NO.4230003/31/2017/1730 VALID FROM 07/06/2016 TO 06/06/2017)

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI HARISH S. MAIGUR, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3;

R4-SERVED; R2 AND R3 LR’S OF DECEASED R1)

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 11.02.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.505/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, GOKAK, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.13,92,000/- WITH INTEREST AT 9% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ITS DEPOSIT & ETC.

THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI

ORAL JUDGMENT

Challenging judgment and award dated 11.02.2019 passed in MVC.no.505/2017 by Prl. Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Gokak, (‘Tribunal’, for short), this appeal is filed.

2. Sri GN Raichur, learned counsel for appellant submitted, appeal was by insurer challenging finding of Tribunal on liability, negligence as well as on quantum. It was submitted, as per claimants at about 7:50 pm on 22.11.2016, when Shikandar was riding bicycle near Koli Khoot, Gokak, driver of Truck no.KA-51/B-9066 drove it in rash and negligent manner, lost control and dashed against bicycle. In accident, Shikandar sustained grievous injuries and died during treatment on 25.11.2016. Alleging loss of dependency on account of his sudden death, his parents and unmarried sister filed claim petition against owner and insurer of truck under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (‘MV Act’, for short).

3. Despite service of notice, owner did not appear and was placed ex-parte. Only insurer opposed claim petition on all grounds.

4. Based on pleadings, Tribunal framed issues and recorded evidence, wherein claimant no.3 and an eyewitness deposed as PWs-1 and 2 and got marked Exs.P1 to P17, while, Insurer examined its official as RW-1 and got marked Exs.R1 to R4.

5. On consideration, Tribunal held accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of insured truck by its driver and therefore, insurer was liable to pay compensation assessed by it at Rs.13,92,000/- with interest at 9% per annum from date of petition. Aggrieved, present appeal was filed.

6. Firstly, insofar as liability, it was submitted, Ex.P9 –

Charge sheet would indicate driver of truck was prosecuted for driving unregistered vehicle i.e. under Section 39 of MV Act apart from Sections 279 and 304A of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’, for short). Same would establish that as on date of accident, truck was unregistered. As driving an unregistered vehicle was a fundamental breach of terms and conditions of policy, insurer could not be held liable.

7. Insofar as negligence, it was submitted, accident spot was at a distance of 6 feet from southern edge of a 25 feet wide road running