M/S UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD vs SMT. SADIQUAH FATHIMAH
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53389-DB
MFA No. 532 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010289772020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 25 DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.SHANTHI BHUSHAN
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 532 OF 2021 (MV-D)
BETWEEN:
M/S UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD
BY ITS REGIONAL OFFICE,
TH TH
KRUSHI BHAVAN, 5 & 6 FLOOR,
NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, HUDSON CIRCLE,
BENGALURU 560 001.
BY ITS MANAGER.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. JWALA KUMAR.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SMT. SADIQUAH FATHIMAH
W/O LATE NISAR KHAN,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
TH
NO 44,6 CROSS, ABBAYAPPA BLOCK,
DINNUR MAIN ROAD, EX-SERVICEMEN COLONY,
R T NAGAR, BENGALURU 560 032.
2. MOHAMMED ASLAM
S/O MOHAMMED AMANULLA
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS
TH TH
NO.66, 6 CROSS, 5 MAIN,
VASANTHAPPA BLOCK, GANGANAGAR
BENGALURU-560 032.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.G.S.MANJUNATH, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
V.C.O DATED 21.03.2022,
NOTICE TO R2 HELD SUFFICIENT)
Digitally signed
by MALA K N
Location:
HIGH COURT
OF
KARNATAKA
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53389-DB
MFA No. 532 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010289772020
THIS MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 22.11.2019 PASSED IN MVC
NO.4489/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL JUDGE
AND ACMM, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU SCCH-13,
AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.29,38,588/- WITH
INTEREST AT 6 PERCENT P.A FROM THE DATE OF PETITION
TILL THE DEPOSIT OF THE AMOUNT IN THE TRIBUNAL
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH
AND
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.SHANTHI BHUSHAN
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.SHANTHI BHUSHAN)
The present appeal is filed challenging the impugned
nd
order dated 22 November, 2019 passed by the Court of II
Additional Small Causes Judge & Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, Bengaluru (SCCH-13) ( ‘Tribunal’ ) in MVC No.
4489/2014, awarding a compensation of Rs.29,38,588/- with
interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date
of deposit in the Tribunal.
2. For the sake of convenience, parties shall be
referred to as per their status before the Tribunal.
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53389-DB
MFA No. 532 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010289772020
3. The Claimant, Smt. Sadiqah Fathimah, instituted a
claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act,
1988, ( ‘M.V. Act’ ) registered as MVC No. 4489/2014, seeking
a total compensation of Rs.30,00,000/- on account of the
untimely demise of her husband, Sri Nisar Khan, in a road
traffic accident. It was averred in the petition that on
04.07.2014 at approximately 8:30 P.M., the deceased Nisar
Khan, aged about 57 years, was proceeding as a pillion rider on
a motorcycle bearing Registration No. KA-02-EU-7200, ridden
cautiously and slowly by one Mahamad Hafiz on the left side of
Dinnur Main Road, R.T. Nagar, Bengaluru. While attempting to
reach Masjid Road near Vinayaka Fashion Shop, a Suzuki Fiero
motorcycle bearing Registration No. KA-04-Y-6683, ridden by
its rider in a high speed, rash, and negligent manner
endangering human life, came from the opposite direction and
rammed into the motorcycle. As a direct consequence of the
catastrophic impact, Sri Nisar Khan suffered grave and multiple
traumatic injuries. He was immediately rushed to M.S. Ramaiah
Hospital, where he underwent intensive neurological treatment
but ultimately succumbed to his fatal injuries on 09.07.2014.
The Claimant asserted that the deceased was the sole earning
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53389-DB
MFA No. 532 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010289772020
member of the family, leaving her in profound financial distress
and deprivation.
4. Upon service of notice, respondent No. 1-Owner of
the Suzuki Fiero motorcycle, failed to appear and was placed
ex-parte . Subsequently, respondent No. 1 submitted objections
asserting that he was acquitted in the corresponding criminal
proceeding (CC No. 835/2015) and contended that the accident
occurred attributable to the negligence of the rider of the
motorcycle KA-02-EU-7200, Mahamad Hafiz. Respondent No. 2
- United India Insurance Company Ltd. / Appellant herein filed
its statement of objections and affidavit denying the rashness
and negligence attributed to the rider of the Suzuki Fiero
motorcycle. They contended inter alia that there was non-
joinder of necessary parties, that the rider of the motorcycle
KA-02-EU-7200 contributed to the occurrence of the accident,
and that the rider of the offending vehicle bearing registration
No. KA-04-Y-6683 did not possess a valid and effective driving
licence on the date of the accident, thereby committing a
fundamental breach of policy conditions. Consequently, they
asserted that it was completely absolved of any financial
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53389-DB
MFA No. 532 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010289772020
liability to indemnify the owner or pay compensation to the
Claimant.
.
5 Before the Tribunal, the petitioner-Claimant
examined three witnesses, PW-1 - wife of the deceased, PW-2 -
Neurosurgeon, and PW-3 - HR Manager at BEML and produced
documentary evidence marked as Ex. P-1 to Ex. P-18, including
the FIR, police spot mahazar, sketch, post-mortem and hospital
records, charge sheet, BEML salary slip/appointment/promotion
letters, and IT returns. In response, the respondents examined
three witnesses, RW-1 - owner/rider of the vehicle , RW-2 -
Administrative Officer for United India Insurance Co., RW-3 -
Investigating Officer and submitted documents marked as
Ex.R-1 to Ex. R-4, which included the judgment and deposition
copy from the criminal trial (C.C. No. 835/2015) alongside the
Section 133 MV Act notice and its reply.
6. The Tribunal has held that the accident occurred
exclusively on account of the rash and negligent riding of the
Suzuki Fiero motorcycle bearing registration No. KA-04-Y-6683.
The Tribunal determined the gross compensation payable at
Rs.54,77,198/-, and after deducting 50% towards personal and
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53389-DB
MFA No. 532 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010289772020
living expenses of the deceased, awarded a total sum of
Rs.29,38,588/- with interest at 6% per annum. Applying the
settled legal doctrine of pay and recover , the Tribunal directed
the Insurance Company to deposit the awarded compensation
at the first instance and granted full liberty to recover the same
from respondent No. 1- Owner of the vehicle due to the
absence of a valid driving licence.
7. Aggrieved by the said order, respondent No. 2 is
before this Court, challenging the same.
8. Heard the arguments of Sri. Jwala Kumar, learned
counsel for the appellant/respondent No.2 and Sri. G.S.
Manjunath, learned counsel for the petitioner/respondent No.1,
and perused the records.
9.
Sri. Jwala Kumar, learned counsel for the
respondent No.2 submitted that the Tribunal committed a
grave error in law and on facts in saddling sole liability upon
the offending vehicle. He contended that at first blush, the
evidence on record reveals operational negligence and
contributory fault on the part of the rider of the motorcycle
bearing registration No. KA-02-EU-7200, which was omitted
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53389-DB
MFA No. 532 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010289772020
from consideration due to non-joinder of parties. Furthermore,
counsel forcefully urged that once a fundamental breach of
policy conditions was established namely, that the driver of the
offending vehicle possessed no valid driving licence, the
Insurance Company ought to have been entirely exonerated
from indemnifying the insured or satisfying the award, rather
than invoking the principle of pay and recover . Lastly, it was
submitted that the quantum of compensation awarded under
various heads is highly excessive and lacks proper judicial
justification.
10.
Sri. G.S. Manjunath, learned counsel for the
petitioner/respondent No.1 submitted that the findings
recorded by the Tribunal are unassailable and impeccably
grounded on evidence. He urged that the Investigating Officer
(RW-3), after painstaking investigation and spot inspection,
submitted a final Charge Sheet (Ex. P-11) squarely attributing
culpable negligence to the driver of the Suzuki Fiero
motorcycle. Learned counsel emphasized that acquittal in
criminal proceedings (Ex. R-1) under the rigorous standard of
proof beyond reasonable doubt cannot override or negate
findings of negligence recorded by a Motor Accident Claims
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53389-DB
MFA No. 532 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010289772020
Tribunal under the well-settled civil standard of preponderance
of probabilities . On the principle of statutory indemnification,
counsel posited that established precedents of the Apex Court
consistently protect innocent third-party victims by directing
the insurer to satisfy the award first and recover from the
defaulting owner. Thus, he prayed for the complete dismissal of
the appeal.
11.
Having heard the learned counsel for both sides and
upon perusal of the material on record, the primary question
that arises for consideration is;
“Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding the
rider of the offending vehicle solely negligent,
directing the Appellant-Insurer to pay and recover
the awarded compensation of Rs.29,38,588/-, and
whether the said Judgment and Award suffers from
any legal or factual infirmity.”
12. A meticulous examination of the records
demonstrates that the accident transpired on 04.07.2014,
leading to the registration of an FIR (Ex. P-1) and subsequent
detailed investigation by the law enforcement authority. The
Investigating Officer, examined as RW-3, unequivocally
affirmed in her testimony that upon examining eyewitnesses,
- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53389-DB
MFA No. 532 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010289772020
conducting spot inspection, and preparing the Spot Mahazar
(Ex. P-2) and Spot Sketch (Ex. P-3), a final Charge Sheet (Ex.
P-11) was laid exclusively against the driver of the Suzuki Fiero
motorcycle bearing Registration No. KA-04-Y-6683.
13. The contention of the appellant that acquittal of
respondent No. 2 in criminal proceedings (Ex. R-1) absolves
liability is completely devoid of merit. It is a settled proposition
of law that standard of proof in criminal trials rests on proof
beyond reasonable doubt , whereas adjudication under Section
166 of the MV Act is governed strictly by the doctrine of
preponderance of probabilities . The testimony of PW-1,
reinforced by documentary evidence (Ex. P-1 to Ex. P-5 and Ex.
P-11), firmly establishes that the Suzuki Fiero motorcycle was
ridden in a rash and negligent manner. Respondent No.2 failed
to adduce any tangible evidence to substantiate its claim of
contributory negligence against the rider of motorcycle KA-02-
EU-7200. Therefore, the finding of sole negligence recorded by
the Tribunal is legally sound and calls for no interference.
14. The core legal challenge mounted by the insurance
company pertains to being directed to satisfy the award despite
- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53389-DB
MFA No. 532 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010289772020
a breach of policy condition regarding driving licence. It is well
settled by the Constitution Bench and subsequent rulings of the
Supreme Court notably in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v.
1
Swaran Singh , Shamanna v. Divisional Manager,
2
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. , and Parminder Singh v. New
3
India Assurance Co. Ltd. that statutory insurance coverage
under the Motor Vehicles Act is designed as a social welfare
measure to protect innocent third-party victims. Where the
insurer establishes a breach of policy conditions on account of
the driver not holding a valid driving licence, the rights of third
parties remain paramount. The appropriate statutory relief in
such circumstances is to direct the Insurance Company to
satisfy the award in favor of the claimant at the first instance
and afford liberty to recover the same from the owner of the
vehicle ( pay and recover ). The Tribunal has meticulously
followed this binding legal principle, safeguarding both the
third-party Claimant and the Insurer's right to recovery.
1
(2004) 3 SCC 297
2
(2018) 9 SCC 650
3
(2019) 7 SCC 217
- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53389-DB
MFA No. 532 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010289772020
15. The Tribunal evaluated the income of the deceased
by relying upon authentic statutory proof, namely the Income
Tax Returns for Assessment Years 2011-12, 2012-13, and
2013-14 marked as Ex. P-17. The calculation of gross loss of
dependency at Rs.54,77,198/-, followed by a deduction of 50%
towards personal and living expenses, resulting in an award of
Rs.29,38,588/- with 6% interest per annum, strictly conforms
to the principles enunciated in Sarla Verma v. Delhi
4
Transport Corporation and National Insurance Co. Ltd. v.
5
Pranay Sethi . The compensation awarded is just, fair, and
equitable. Accordingly, the following:
ORDER
•
The Miscellaneous First Appeal filed by the Appellant–
United India Insurance Company Ltd. is hereby
dismissed.
nd
•
The Judgment and Award dated 22 November, 2019
passed by the Court of II Additional Small Causes Judge
& Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru (SCCH-13)
4
(2009) 6 SCC 121
5
(2017) 16 SCC 680
- 12 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53389-DB
MFA No. 532 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010289772020
in MVC No. 4489/2014 is hereby affirmed and confirmed
in all respects.
•
The Appellant–Insurance Company is directed to deposit
the entire awarded compensation amount along with
accrued interest before the Tribunal within a period of six
weeks from today, if not already deposited, with liberty to
recover the same from respondent No. 2 - Owner in
accordance with law.
•
The amount in deposit before this Court, if any, shall be
transmitted forthwith to the Tribunal for necessary
disbursement to the Claimant as per the award.
Sd/-
(D K SINGH)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(H.SHANTHI BHUSHAN)
JUDGE
BVK
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27