SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 25692

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
ASHOK S. KINAGI
CHOLAMANDALA MS GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. – Appellant
Versus
MANJUNATHA SWAMY S/O. MALLIKARJUNAYYA HIREMATH – Respondent
MFA 104868/2024



##PAGE1##

- 1 -

NC: 2026:KHC-D:6198

MFA No. 104868 of 2024

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD

DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.104868 OF 2024 (MV-I)

BETWEEN:

CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,

BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER,

MAGAVI CHAMBERS,

P.B. ROAD, HAVERI,

BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY.

…APPELLANT

(BY SRI. R.R. MANE, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. MANJUNATHA SWAMY

S/O. MALLIKARJUNAYYA HIREMATH,

AGE. 31 YEARS, OCC. PHOTOGRAPHY,

R/O. WARD NO.1, SHIDENUR,

BYADAGI, TQ. BYADAGI,

DIST. HAVERI-581106.

Digita lly signed by

MOHANKUMAR B

2. SIDDALINGESH S/O. MAHADEVAPPA SHIDENUR,

SHELAR

AGE ABOUT 27 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE,

Location: HIGH

COURT OF R/O. KOLLAPURA, TQ. BYADAGI,

KARNATAKA

DIST. HAVERI-581106.

(OWNER OF ROYAL ENFIELD BULLET

MOTORBIKE BEARING NO.KA-2020/TR-9058 AV)

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. G.D. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R1;

NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH)

THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION

173(1) OF MV ACT, 1988, ALLOW THIS APPEAL, REDUCE THE AMOUNT

OF COMPENSATION AND RATE OF INTEREST BY SETTING ASIDE THE

JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 03.07.2024 PASSED IN MVC

NO.398/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C.

AT BYADAGI AND ETC.,.

##PAGE2##

- 2 -

NC: 2026:KHC-D:6198

MFA No. 104868 of 2024

HC-KAR

THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL, COMING ON FOR

ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS

UNDER:

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI)

This appeal is filed by the Insurance Company challenging

the judgment and award dated 03.07.2024 passed in

MVC No.398/2021 by the Court of the learned Senior Civil Judge

and JMFC, Byadagi (‘Tribunal’ for short).

2. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this appeal are

as follows:

2.1. On 07.10.2020, respondent No.1 was proceeding on

a motorcycle bearing Reg.No.KA-27/EC-4958. When he reached

near the accident spot, at that time, respondent No.2 owner-

cum-rider of the motorcycle bearing Reg.No.KA-2020/TR-9058

AV rode the said motorcycle in a rash and negligent manner and

dashed to the motorcycle of respondent No.1 and caused the

accident. As a result, respondent No.1 has sustained grievous

injuries on his face, right eyes, etc. Hence, has spent huge

amount towards medical expenses and he has suffered

##PAGE3##

- 3 -

NC: 2026:KHC-D:6198

MFA No. 104868 of 2024

HC-KAR

permanent disability. He filed a claim petition under Section 166

of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, before the Tribunal claiming

compensation on account of the injuries sustained in the road

traffic accident. Accordingly, prays to allow the claim petition.

2.2. A notice was issued to the owner of the offending

motorcycle i.e., respondent No.1 before the Tribunal. Despite

service of notice, he remained unrepresented and was placed

ex-parte.

2.3. The Insurance Company i.e., appellant herein filed a

statement of objections denying the averments made in the

claim petition and contended that, the accident occurred due to

rash and negligent riding by respondent No.1 himself and the

accident did not occur due to the rash and negligent riding on

the part of respondent No.2. Respondent No.2 was not

possessing valid and effective driving licence as of the date

of the accident. Hence, prays to dismiss the claim petition

against the Insurance Company.

2.4. The Tribunal, based on the pleadings of the

parties, framed the relevant issues.

##PAGE4##

- 4 -

NC: 2026:KHC-D:6198

MFA No. 104868 of 2024

HC-KAR

2.5. Respondent No.1 herein, to substantiate his

claim, examined himself as PW1, examined the Doctor as

PW2 and marked 227 documents as Exs.P1 to P227. In

rebuttal, the Insurance Company has led neither oral nor

documentary evidence.

2.6. The Tribunal, after assessing the verbal and

documentary evidence, allowed the claim petition in part

and awarded a compensation of ₹7,03,383/- along with

interest at the rate of 8% p.a., from the date of petition till

the date of deposit, and directed the Insurance Company to

deposit the award amount with accrued interest.

3. The Insurance Company, aggrieved by the

impugned judgm

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top