THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED vs SHRI SHAMKANT S/O BHASKAR NAIK SINCE DECEASED
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16538
MFA No. 102695 of 2022
CNR: KAHC020133432022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD
TH
DATED THIS THE 5 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.G.SHANTHI
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 102695 OF 2022 (MV-D)
BETWEEN:
THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
REPRESENTED BY THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
BELAGAVI D/O AT AMAR EMPIRE,
KHANAPUR ROAD,
BELAGAVI,
NOW REPRESENTED BY REGIONAL
MANAGER 590001
SUMANGALA COMPLEX
NEAR HDMC,
HUBBALLI-580029.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. MADHUKESHWAR DESHPANDE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SHRI SHAMKANT
S/O. BHASKAR NAIK
SINCE DECEASED
SMT. SAMPADA W/O SHAMKANT NAIK
AGE: 57 YEARS,
OCC: HOUSE HOLD WORK,
R/O: #36, KABBE COMPOUND,
SOMWAR PETH, TILAKWADI,
BELAGAVI-590001.
2. SHRIKANT ANANDRAO KADAM
AGE: MAJOR,
OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O. ANANDVAN BUILDING,
RD
PLOT NO. 75, 3 CROSS,
SHAHU NAGAR,
BELAGAVI-590010.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. PRASHANT MATHAPATI, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
NOTICE TO R2 IS SERVED)
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16538
MFA No. 102695 of 2022
CNR: KAHC020133432022
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT,
1988, PRAYING TO CALL THE RECORDS, HEAR THE PARTIES AND
ALLOW THE APPEAL AS PRAYED FOR BY SETTING ASIDE THE
IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 22.02.2022 PASSED BY
THE V ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND ADDL. MACT,
BELAGAVI, IN MVC NO.1276/2020 WITH COST IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.G.SHANTHI
ORAL JUDGMENT
Aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 22.02.2022
passed in MVC No.1276/2020 by the V Additional District and
Sessions Judge and Additional M.A.C.T., Belagavi, (for short,
‘the Tribunal’), respondent No.2-the insurer of the truck
bearing No.KA-22/C-3307 filed the above appeal challenging
the liability fixed against it.
2. Parties are hereinafter referred to as per their
ranking before the Tribunal for the sake of convenience
3. Brief facts of the case are that on 20.09.2020,
Ketan S/o Shamkant Naik, aged about 22 years, was travelling
from Belagavi to Kiniye on his motorcycle bearing No.KA-22-
EU-1928. At about 12:05 a.m., near Sri.Siddivinayak English
Medium School, he hit a truck bearing No.KA-22/C-3307, which
Digitally Signed by KADAMBADI
GANESH SHANTHI on 14-10-2026
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16538
MFA No. 102695 of 2022
CNR: KAHC020133432022
had been left in the middle of the road by its driver without any
warning signal, parking light, or indication. The visibility was
also affected by the high-beam lights of oncoming vehicles.
Due to the accident, Ketan suffered fatal injuries and died on
the spot.
4. The deceased was healthy and working as a Sales
Representative with BPCL, earning about ₹30,000 per month.
His death caused the petitioners mental, physical and financial
hardship.
5. Accordingly, petitioners filed a claim petition
claiming compensation.
6. On filing of the petition, notice has been issued to
the respondents. Respondent No.1 remained absent and placed
ex parte. Respondent No.2 appeared and filed the objections
denied the averments of the petition and contended that the
accident did not occur as alleged and that the offending truck
was falsely implicated to claim compensation. It was denied
that the accident was caused by the rash and negligent driving
of the truck driver. Further contended that the deceased was
riding the motorcycle without a valid driving licence and
Digitally Signed by KADAMBADI
GANESH SHANTHI on 14-10-2026
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16538
MFA No. 102695 of 2022
CNR: KAHC020133432022
helmet, and that the truck driver also did not have a valid
driving licence. The respondent denied the deceased’s age,
income, occupation, disability and medical expenses. Therefore,
respondent No.2 sought for dismissal of the petition.
7. On the basis of said contentions of the parties, the
Tribunal has framed the following issues:
“ISSUES
1. Whether the petitioner proves that her son died in a
road traffic accident that occurred on 20.09.2020
at about 00.05 hours on Belagavi Jamboti road,
within the limits of Badarwadi village, in front of
Sri. Siddivinayak English Medium School while
riding his motorcycle bearing No.KA-22/EU1928,
due to negligent act on the part of the driver of the
truck bearing No.KA-22/C3307 by parking the
same on the middle of the road without following
the traffic regulations?
2. Whether the 2nd respondent proves that the
deceased was not having driving license and he
was riding the motorcycle in a negligent manner
and without helmet and therefore he is responsible
for the accident?
3. Whether the petitioner is entitled for compensation?
If so, from whom and to what extent?
4. What order or award?”
Digitally Signed by KADAMBADI
GANESH SHANTHI on 14-10-2026
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16538
MFA No. 102695 of 2022
CNR: KAHC020133432022
8. Before the Tribunal, petitioner No.2 herself
examined as P.W.1 and got marked 11 documents as Exs.P.1
to P.11. On the other hand respondent No.2 examined its
Administrative Officer as RW.1 and got marked Exs.R1 and R.2.
9. On hearing the argument, the Tribunal allowed the
claim petition in part and fastening the liability on the
respondents, awarded compensation to the petitioners under
the following heads:
Compensation
Sl.No. Heads
amount in Rs.
1 Loss of dependency 24,75,438/-
Transportation of dead body and
2 15,000/-
funeral expenses.
3 Loss of Estate 15,000/-
Loss of love and affection and
4 40,000/-
filial consortium
Total 25,45,438/-
10. Aggrieved by the same, the insurance company
filed this appeal.
11. Learned counsel for appellant Sri.Madhukeshwar
Deshpande argued that there is a collision between the truck
bearing No.KA-22/C-3307 and motorcycle bearing No.KA-
22/EU-1928 and the police have filed a charge sheet against
Digitally Signed by KADAMBADI
GANESH SHANTHI on 14-10-2026
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16538
MFA No. 102695 of 2022
CNR: KAHC020133432022
the driver of the truck as well as the rider of the motorcycle for
the offence punishable under Sections 279 and 304 IPC; the
width of the road is 24 feet and lorry has been parked on the
extreme left side of the road; though, there was sufficient
space towards the right side of the rider of the motorcycle, he
did not take his vehicle towards right and dashed to the parked
vehicle; that the accident occurred due to the negligent riding
of the motorcycle. However, the Tribunal attributed entire
negligence on the part of the driver of the stationed lorry which
is erroneous. Accordingly, pray for modify the liability saddled
against the truck by allowing the appeal.
12. Per contra , learned counsel for the respondents
argued that the finding of the Tribunal is proper and correct
and there is no need to interfere.
13. 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 Tribunal is justified in
attributing the liability in entirety against the
appellant/insurance company?
Digitally Signed by KADAMBADI
GANESH SHANTHI on 14-10-2026
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16538
MFA No. 102695 of 2022
CNR: KAHC020133432022
(ii) Whether the petitioner proves that the
compensation awarded by the Tribunal is
inadequate and it deserves to be modified?
(iii) What order?
14. Points framed by this Court for consideration are
answered as follows:
Point No.(i) : Partly in the affirmative.
Point No.(ii): In the affirmative
Point No.(iii): As per the final order, for the
following:
REASONS
15. Regarding Point No.(i): The alleged accident
occurred on 20.09.2020 at midnight 12:00 hours on Belagavi-
Jamboti road. It is not in dispute that at the time of accident,
the truck bearing No.KA-22/C-3307 was halted on the road and
motorcycle rider came behind i.e., the same direction and
dashed to the truck from behind, resulted with, the driver of
the truck sustained grievous injury and died at the spot.
According to the respondent, the rider of the motorcycle also
contributed his negligence to the accident as he has not taken
the vehicle towards right, though there was sufficient space.
Digitally Signed by KADAMBADI
GANESH SHANTHI on 14-10-2026
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16538
MFA No. 102695 of 2022
CNR: KAHC020133432022
The Ex.P.3 is a spot mahazar drawn by the investigating officer
and sketch has been prepared in the spot. The Motor Vehicle
inspection report indicates that the right side of the rear, safety
grade damaged and other parts of the truck were in order. The
motorcycle bearing No.KA-22/EU-1928 parts such as front
forks, head light cover, front wheel mudguard, crush guard,
front right side mudguard got damaged and other parts were in
order. This accident occurred on Belagavi-Jamboti road. The
mahazar indicates that towards the eastern side, in a distance
of 23 feet there is a speed breaker signal board. The Ex.P.1
complaint filed by one Dananjay Ganesh Deshpande alleging
that the driver of the truck stationed the vehicle on the road
without switching on the parking indicator. The motorcycle
came from Peeranvadi side and the rider of the motorcycle
driven the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and dashed
to the stationed truck from behind and motorcycle rider died on
the spot. Based on the complaint, the police have investigated
the matter and filed a charge sheet against the rider of the
motorcycle as well as the driver of the truck bearing No.KA-
22/C-3307. Admittedly, the accident occurred in the midnight
Digitally Signed by KADAMBADI
GANESH SHANTHI on 14-10-2026
- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16538
MFA No. 102695 of 2022
CNR: KAHC020133432022
i.e. on the highway. The respondent did not produce any
material evidence on what made the truck driver to park the
vehicle on the road in the midnight hours. It is evident that, he
has not switched on the light indicator and did not give any
signal, hazard giving caution to the movers in the vehicle on
road.
16. It is pertinent to note that the rider of the
motorcycle was also came by riding the vehicle in a rash and
negligent manner and dashed to the truck. No doubt the
motorcycle rider cannot anticipate that the truck was halted in
the middle of the road. However, the record reflects that there
was a quote indicating the road hump. The rider of the
motorcycle also not bothered to observe the indication placed
by the side of the road. The driver of the truck also not took
proper precaution before stationing his vehicle on the road. The
legal representatives of the rider of the motorcycle filed a claim
petition. They are not an eyewitness to the incident. So the
entire case is based on the prosecution paper.
17. In this case, the police have filed a charge sheet
against the rider of the motorcycle as well as the driver of the
Digitally Signed by KADAMBADI
GANESH SHANTHI on 14-10-2026
- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16538
MFA No. 102695 of 2022
CNR: KAHC020133432022
truck. The charge sheet filed against the deceased has not been
challenged by anyone. Further, the driver of the truck also not
examined to show that, he has not contributed his negligence.
It is pertinent to note that there is no evidence available before
the Court to show that the driver of the truck has taken proper
precaution. This Court is of the opinion that, when the road is a
two way, the motorcycle rider also cannot take the vehicle
towards the right side of the road when the vehicles are moving
in the other direction also.
18. The contention taken by the appellant that the rider
of the motorcycle could have taken his vehicle towards right
side as there was sufficient space from the right side of the
truck cannot be accepted. The gravity of the incident that the
motorcycle rider sustained injury and died in the spot itself. By
looking into the evidence, it is very clear that the motorcycle
rider also rode the motorcycle in a rash and negligent manner
and contributed his negligence to the accident. But regarding
the percentage of negligence is concerned, It indicates that the
driver of the truck contributed his negligence to a greater
extent than the motorcycle rider and rider of the motorcycle
Digitally Signed by KADAMBADI
GANESH SHANTHI on 14-10-2026
- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16538
MFA No. 102695 of 2022
CNR: KAHC020133432022
contributed part of his negligence to this incident, ignoring
signal light, which indicated the hump. If he has observed that
indication, definitely he could have slowed down his motorcycle
and gravity would be reduced.
19. Further looking into the above discussion, this Court
is of the opinion that, the driver of the lorry contributed his
negligence to the extent of 80% and the rider of the motorcycle
contributed his negligence to the extent of 20%. Accordingly,
point No.1 is answered partly in the affirmative .
20. Regarding Point No.(ii): The Tribunal has
awarded a compensation of ₹15,000/- each under the heads of
funeral expenses and loss of estate. In view of the law laid
down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in National Insurance
1
Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi , it is escalated with 10%
i.e., to ₹16,500/- each.
21. Further the Tribunal has awarded compensation of
₹40,000/- under the heads of filial consortium. It is escalated
with 10% i.e., to ₹44,000/-.
1
(2017) 16 SCC 680
Digitally Signed by KADAMBADI
GANESH SHANTHI on 14-10-2026
- 12 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16538
MFA No. 102695 of 2022
CNR: KAHC020133432022
22. The Tribunal rightly awarded compensation towards
loss of dependency, which is just and reasonable and does not
call for interference.
23. Thus, the petitioner would be entitled for
compensation under various heads as under:
HEAD AMOUNT
Towards loss of dependency ₹24,75,438/-
Towards transportation of dead
₹ 16,500/-
body and funeral expenses.
Towards loss of estate. ₹16,500/-
Towards filial consortium ₹44,000/-
TOTAL ₹25,52,438/-
24. Thus, the claimant is entitled for total compensation
of ₹25,52,438/- , as against ₹25,45,438/- awarded by the
Tribunal.
25. Accordingly, point No.2 is answered in the
affirmative .
26. Regarding Point No.(iii): In view of the finding
on point Nos.1 and 2, this Court proceeds to pass the following:
Digitally Signed by KADAMBADI
GANESH SHANTHI on 14-10-2026
- 13 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16538
MFA No. 102695 of 2022
CNR: KAHC020133432022
ORDER
a) The appeal filed by the appellant/insurance
company under Section 173(1) of Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988 is allowed in part .
b) However, judgment and award passed by
the Tribunal , is modified holding that
petitioner is entitled for total compensation
of ₹ 25,52,438 /- instead of ₹25,45,438/-
awarded by the Tribunal .
c) Respondents No.1 and 2 are jointly and
severally liable to pay the compensation of
80% of the compensation i.e ₹20,41,950 /-
out of total compensation of ₹25,52,438/-.
d) The compensation shall carry interest at 6%
per annum from the date of petition till
realization.
e) The compensation amount with accrued
interest shall be deposited before the
Tribunal within a period of 8 weeks from the
date of receipt of certified copy of this
judgment.
f) Amount in deposit be transmitted to the
Tribunal. If the amount is in excess, be
refunded to the insurer on proper
identification.
Digitally Signed by KADAMBADI
GANESH SHANTHI on 14-10-2026
- 14 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16538
MFA No. 102695 of 2022
CNR: KAHC020133432022
g) Registry to transmit the TCR to the Tribunal
forthwith.
h) In view of disposal of the appeal, the
pending interlocutory applications, if any,
stand disposed of.
Digitally Signed by KADAMBADI
GANESH SHANTHI on 14-10-2026
(K.G.SHANTHI)
JUDGE
SSP
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 35