1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H. T. NARENDRA PRASAD

MFA No.7854 OF 2010(MV)

BETWEEN:

SRI PUTTEGOWDA

S/O HUCHEGOWDA

AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS

R/A C/O K.G.RAMACHANDRA

NO.3110, GROUND FLOOR

KUMARASWAMY LAYOUT

BANGALORE-78.

...APPELLANT

(BY SMT.P V KALPANA , ADV.)

AND

1.

THE REGIONAL MANAGER

M/S NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.,

BANGALORE

REGIONAL OFFICE 2-B

UNITY BUILDING ANNEX

P KALINGA RAO ROAD

(OLD MISSION ROAD)

BANGALORE-27.

2.

SHIVA MARI GOWDA

S/O KARIYAPPA

2

MAJOR IN AGE

PERIORA ROAD ERODE

ERODE DISTRICT

TAMILNADU-630001.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.A.N.KRISHNASWAMY, ADV. FOR R1:

NOTICE TO R2 IS HELD SUFFICIENT

V/O DATED:06.06.2013)

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF

MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD

DATED:09.06.2010 PASSED IN MVC NO.7148/2008

ON THE FILE OF THE IV ADDITIONAL JUDGE, COURT

OF SMALL CAUSES-6, MEMBERACT, BANGALORE

DISMISSING THE PEITITON FOR COMPENSATION.

THIS MFA COMING ON FOR HEARING,THROUGH

VIDEO

CONFERENCE,

THIS

DAY,

THE

COURT

DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

This appeal under Section 173(1) of the Motor

Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’,

for short) has been filed by the claimant being

3

aggrieved by the judgment dated 9.6.2010 passed by

the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal.

2.

Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal

briefly stated are that on 29.8.2008, the claimant was

proceeding as pillion rider on motorcycle bearing

registration

No.KA-11-H-8102

near

Chikkallahalli,

Sathanur-Doddalahalli

Road,

Kanakapura

Taluk,

Ramanagara District, at that time, another motorcycle

i.e., Royal Enfield Bullet bearing registration No.TN-

33-F-3053 being driven by its driver at a high speed

and in a rash and negligent manner, dashed to the

vehicle of the claimant. As a result of the aforesaid

accident, the claimant sustained grievous injuries and

was hospitalized.

3.

The claimant filed a petition under Section

166 of the Act seeking compensation. It was pleaded

that

he

spent

huge

amount

towards

medical

4

expenses, conveyance, etc. It was further pleaded

that the accident occurred purely on account of the

rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by

its driver.

4.

On service of notice, the respondent No.1

appeared through counsel and filed written statement

in which the averments made in the petition were

denied. It was pleaded that the petition itself is false

and frivolous in the eye of law. It was further pleaded

that the offending vehicle was not involved in the

accident. The claimant had no valid driving licence as

on the date of the accident. Hence, he sought for

dismissal of the petition.

The respondent No.2 did not appear before the

Tribunal inspite of service of notice and was placed

ex-parte.

5

5.

On the basis of the pleadings of the parties,

the Claims Tribunal framed the issues and thereafter

recorded the evidence. The Claims Tribunal, by the

impugned judgment, inter alia, dismissed the claim

petition. Being aggrieved, this appeal has been filed.

6.

The learned counsel for the claimant has

contended that the claimant has suffered injury in the

road traffic accident occurred on 29.8.2008 due to the

rash and negligent riding of the Royal Enfield bullet

motorcycle by its rider. Immediately after the

accident, the rider of the motorcycle bearing No.KA-

11-H-8102 lodged complaint to the police. The police

have registered FIR against the rider of the offending

motorcycle and after thorough investigation, the

police have charge sheeted the rider of the offending

motorcycle. Therefore, it is clear that the claimant

suffered injuries due to the accident occurred on

29.8.2008. The Tribunal without considering the

6

evidence and police records such as FIR and complaint

has erred in dismissing the claim peti