THE BRANCH MANAGER vs SIDDAPPA S/O SURESH TADASNUR

Court
Karnataka High Court

- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18255
MFA No. 101595 of 2025


CNR: KAHC020078402025



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD


TH
DATED THIS THE 5 DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.G.SHANTHI

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101595 OF 2025 (MV-I)

BETWEEN:

THE BRANCH MANAGER
RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
MAHADEV PLAZA, CTS NO.10719,
SY. NO.1357/A, NEAR KOLHAPUR CIRCLE,
NEHARU NAGAR, BELAGAVI-590011,
DIST. BELAGAVI,
(INSURER OF THE VEHICLE NO.KA-22/D-0381)
(PACKAGE POLICY NO.141022123340000638
VALID FROM 25-03-2021 TO 24-03-2022)
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. G. N. RAICHUR, ADVOCATE)

AND:

SIDDAPPA S/O. SURESH TADASNUR
AGE: 38 YEARS,
OCC: DRIVER,
R/O: DEVEGOUDANAHATTI-591218,
TQ: GOKAK.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. SAGAR, I. PATIL, ADVOCATE)

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, 1988, PRAYING TO
CALL FOR THE RECORDS AND HEAR THE PARTIES AND MODIFY THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 13-02-2025 PASSED BY THE COURT
OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MOTOR
ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL GOKAK IN M.V.C. NO. 753 /2022 BY
EXONERATING THE APPELLANT INSURANCE COMPANY FROM
LIABILITY AND REDUCING THE COMPENSATION BY ACCEPTING THE
GROUNDS MADE OUT IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL BY ALLOWING
THIS APPEAL WITH COST IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18255
MFA No. 101595 of 2025


CNR: KAHC020078402025


THIS APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED ON
16.09.2026 COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT, THIS
DAY, THE COURT PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING:

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.G.SHANTHI

CAV JUDGMENT

Aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 13.02.2025
passed in MVC No.753/2022 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge
1
and Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gokak , the
respondent/Insurance Company before the Tribunal filed this
appeal challenging the liability.

2. Parties are hereinafter referred to as per their ranks
before the Tribunal for the sake of convenience.

3. Brief facts of the case are that on 28.09.2021 at
about 2:15 a.m., the petitioner while driving his vehicle bearing
2
No.KA-22/D-0381 from Ghataprabha towards his native place,
an unknown cruiser suddenly applied brakes without indication
near R.J. Petrol Pump, Maladinni Cross, which resulted in an
accident. The petitioner sustained grievous injuries and lost
complete vision in his right eye.

1
For short, ‘the Tribunal’
2
For short, ‘the vehicle’
Digitally Signed by KADAMBADI
GANESH SHANTHI on 06-11-2026

- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18255
MFA No. 101595 of 2025


CNR: KAHC020078402025



4. The petitioner contended that prior to the accident,
he was hale and healthy and was working as a driver and
earning Rs.39,000/- annual income. As the insurer had
collected a premium covering personal accident benefits,
medical expenses, and vehicle repairs but refused to pay the
claim, the petitioner filed a claim petition against the Insurance
Company claiming compensation, before the Tribunal.

5. Upon notice, respondent appeared through its
counsel and filed statement objections denying the entire
contentions of the petitioner and contended that the police filed
a charge sheet against the petitioner under Sections 279 and
338 of the Indian Penal Code, however, the vehicle was not
traced; the petitioner, being the owner of the insured vehicle
could not claim compensation against his own insurer as a third
party; further disputed the jurisdiction of the Court and
maintainability of the petition. Accordingly, prays for dismissal
of the petition.

6. Before the Tribunal, the petitioner himself examined
as PW1 and the doctor was examined as PW2 and got marked
the documents as Exs.P.1 to P.14. On the other hand, the
Digitally Signed by KADAMBADI
GANESH SHANTHI on 06-11-2026

- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18255
MFA No. 101595 of 2025


CNR: KAHC020078402025


respondent did not lead any oral evidence. However, the
insurance policy is marked as Ex. R.1 with consent of the
parties.

7. On hearing the argument, the Tribunal allowed the
claim petition in part with costs by awarding compensation of
Rs.7,50,000/- at the rate of 6% per annum and directed the
respondent to deposit the same within two months from the
date of the order.

8. Dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and
award, respondent/Insurance Company preferred this appeal.

9. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company argued
that coverage of PA is a contractual liability and it is to be
separately dealt with as per the terms and conditions of the
policy; the Court cannot deal with the matter and decide the
petition under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988;
the approach of the Tribunal is highly erroneous and improper
and not sustainable under law and liable to be set aside; the
Tribunal grossly erred in awarding compensation of
Rs.7,50,000/- as per the schedule of injuries under PA cover;
awarding of interest by the Tribunal on compensation amount is
Digitally Signed by KADAMBADI
GANESH SHANTHI on 06-11-2026

- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18255
MFA No. 101595 of 2025


CNR: KAHC020078402025


not sustainable. Accordingly, prays to allow the appeal by
setting aside the impugned judgment and award passed by the
Tribunal.

10. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the
Tribunal rightly appreciated the material available before the
Court and awarded a compensation of Rs.7,50,000/-
considering that the petitioner sustained grievous injuries and
lost the vision. Accordingly, prays for dismissal of the appeal.

11. Heard the arguments. Perused the materials
available on record. The points that would arise for
consideration by this Court are as follows:

(i) Whether the Insurance Company proves that
the impugned judgment and award passed
by the Tribunal is against the law and
provisions?

(ii) Whether the Tribunal is justified in awarding
interest on the compensation amount?

(iii) What order?
Digitally Signed by KADAMBADI
GANESH SHANTHI on 06-11-2026

- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18255
MFA No. 101595 of 2025


CNR: KAHC020078402025



12. Points framed by this Court for consideration are
answered as follows:
Point No.(i) : In the negative.
Point No.(ii) : In the negative.
Point No.(iii): As per the final order, for the
following:

13. Regarding point No.(i): According to the
petitioner, on 28.09.2021 at 02:15 a.m., when he was
returning from Ghataprabha in his vehicle bearing registration
No.KA-22-D-0381 met with an accident caused by unknown
vehicle and sustained grievous injuries and lost a vision of his
right eye. He has taken treatment in different hospitals. He also
contended that the Insurance Company agreed to cover the
expenses incurred for the repair of the vehicle also. However,
the Insurance Company denied the liability in spite of collecting
the premium to cover such risk. He produced the copy of the
FIR, charge sheet, wound certificate and medical records which
marked as Exs.P.1 to P.14. The medical records indicate that,
the petitioner has sustained grievous injuries.

14. The Insurance Company appeared before the
Tribunal and filed objection, but not led any oral evidence. In
Digitally Signed by KADAMBADI
GANESH SHANTHI on 06-11-2026

- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18255
MFA No. 101595 of 2025


CNR: KAHC020078402025


paragraph No.7 of the objection, the Insurance Company stated
that it has agreed to take the liability to pay Rs.15,00,000/- i.e.
100% scale of compensation in respect of death of
owner/driver. Likewise, it has also agreed to take liability to
pay Rs.7,50,000/- i.e. 50% scale of compensation in respect of
loss of sight of one eye.

15. The Insurance Company had produced the policy,
which marked as Ex.R.1 before the Tribunal. The record
produced by the petitioner it clearly indicates that, the
petitioner has sustained grievous injuries, so admittedly the
Insurance Company is liable to pay Rs.7,50,000/- as agreed
and as per the terms of the policy conditions.

16. The admission of the Insurance Company in its
objection and also the policy conditions, it is very clear that,
the Insurance Company is liable to pay the compensation to the
petitioner.

17. By looking into the facts and circumstances, this
Court did not find any reasons to interfere with the impugned
judgment and award regarding compensation of Rs.7,50,000/-
awarded to the petitioner.
Digitally Signed by KADAMBADI
GANESH SHANTHI on 06-11-2026

- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18255
MFA No. 101595 of 2025


CNR: KAHC020078402025



18. Accordingly, point No.(i) is answered in the
negative.

19. Regarding point No.(ii): The liability of the
petitioner and the respondent is a contractual liability, but the
Tribunal awarded an interest at the rate of 6% per annum from
the date of petition till realization of the entire amount. This
Court is of the opinion that, there is no contract between the
parties to pay the interest on the compensation of
Rs.7,50,000/-. So, the interest awarded by the Tribunal on
compensation amount is liable to be set aside.

20. Accordingly, point No.1 is answered in the
negative .

21. Regarding points No.(iii): In view of the findings
on points No.(i) and (ii), this Court proceeds to pass the
following:
ORDER

i) The appeal filed by the Insurance Company is
allowed in part.

ii) The impugned judgment and award passed
by the Tribunal is modified. The petitioner is
entitled to compensation of Rs.7,50,000/-.
Digitally Signed by KADAMBADI
GANESH SHANTHI on 06-11-2026

- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18255
MFA No. 101595 of 2025


CNR: KAHC020078402025



iii) The respondent/Insurance Company is liable
to pay the compensation to the petitioner
and directed to deposit the same before the
Tribunal within a period of four weeks from
the date of receipt of certified copy of this
judgment.

iv) Draw modified award accordingly.

v) Registry to transmit the Trial Court Records
forthwith.

vi) In view of disposal of the appeal, pending
applications, if any, does not survive for
consideration. Accordingly, the same are
disposed of.



(K.G.SHANTHI)
JUDGE

SMM
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 65
Digitally Signed by KADAMBADI
GANESH SHANTHI on 06-11-2026