MFA NO.102702/2014 (MV) C/w. MFA No.102703/2014 : 1 :
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 23 RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2020 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
MFA NO.102702/2014 (MV) C/w. MFA No.102703/2014
IN MFA NO 102702 OF 2014
BETWEEN
BHARAMA S/O MALOJI PATIL, AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: DESUR, TQ & DIST: BELGAUM ... APPELLANT
(BY SRI.GURUKUMAR V.A., ADVOCATE)
AND
1. SMT.RAJASHREE W/O RAJENDRA NAVALEKAR, AGE: 24 YEARS, OCC: NILL, R/O: GODAGERI, TQ: KHANAPUR, DIST:BELGAUM.
2. MASTER HARISH S/O RAJENDRA NAVALEKAR, AGE: 06 YEARS, OCC: NILL, R/O: GODAGERI, TQ: KHANAPUR, DIST: BELGAUM. (SINCE MINOR REPRESENTED BY GUARDIAN MOTHER I.E., PETITIONER NO.1)
3. SMT. AMBAKKA W/O SHANKAR NAVALEKAR, AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: NILL, R/O: GODAGERI, TQ: KHANAPUR, DIST: BELGAUM.
MFA NO.102702/2014 (MV) C/w. MFA No.102703/2014 : 2 :
4. SHRI SHANKAR S/O SAKARAM NAVALEKAR, AGE 56 YEARS, OCC: NILL, R/O: GODAGERI, TQ: KHANAPUR, DIST: BELGAUM.
5. THE GENERAL MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO., LTD., MARUTI GALLI, BELGAUM.
6. MR. BALAPPA PARASHARAM PEDNEKAR, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: KERWAD, TQ: HALIYAL, DIST: UTTAR KANNADA.
7. THE GENERAL MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE CO., LTD., RAMDEV GALLI, BELGAUM. ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.SANJAY S.KATAGERI, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R4; R2 IS MINOR REP. BY R1; SHRI S.S. KOLIWAD, ADVOCATE FOR R5; R6 SERVED BUT UNREPRESENTED)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT 1988, AGAINST JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 09.07.2014, PASSED IN MVC.NO.579/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KHANAPUR, AWARDING THE COMPENSATION OF RS.3,69,000/- WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE DATE OF REALIZATION.
IN MFA NO 102703 OF 2014:
BETWEEN
BHARAMA S/O MALOJI PATIL, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: DESUR, TQ & DIST: BELGAUM. ... APPELLANT
MFA NO.102702/2014 (MV) C/w. MFA No.102703/2014 : 3 :
(BY SRI.GURUKUMAR V.A., ADVOCATE)
AND
1. SMT. RAJASHREE W/O RAJENDRA NAVALEKAR, AGE: 24 YEARS, OCC: NILL, R/O: GODAGERI, TQ: KHANAPUR, DIST: BELGAUM.
2. THE GENERAL MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., MARUTI GALLI, BELGAUM.
3. MR.BALAPPA PARASHARAM PEDNEKAR, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: KERWAD, TQ: HALIYAL, DIST: UTTAR KANNADA.
4. THE GENERAL MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., RAMDEV GALLI, BELGAUM. ... RESPONDENTS
(By Sri.SANJAY S KATAGERI FOR R1; SHRI S.S. KOLIWAF, ADVOCATE FOR R2; R3 IS SERVED BUT UNREPREESENTED; SHRI SHASHANK S.HEGDE FOR SMT. PREETI SHASHANK, ADVOCATE FOR R4)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT 1988, AGAINST JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 09.07.2014, PASSED IN MVC.NO.582/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KHANAPUR, AWARDING THE COMPENSATION OF RS.50,000/- WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE DATE OF REALIZATION.
THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
MFA NO.102702/2014 (MV) C/w. MFA No.102703/2014 : 4 :
JUDGMENT
1. The above appeals have been filed by the Owner of
the vehicle involved in the accident, the subject
matter of the proceedings in MVC Nos.579/2013 and
582/2013.
2. The nature and occurrence of the accident, coverage
of the insurance policy are not in dispute. Hence, the
facts leading up to the accident and thereafter are
therefore not required to be adverted to.
3. By way of the aforesaid judgment, the tribunal had
imposed the entire liability on the owner of the vehicle
on the ground that the driver of the vehicle did not
possess a licence to drive the vehicle in question. In
regard to this the tribunal has considered Ex.R1 being
the charge sheet filed under Sections 279 and 304 of
the IPC read with Section 3 along with 181 of the M.V.
Act, to hold that since the charge sheet was laid under
Section 3 of the M.V. Act and there was no valid
driving licence and in this regard, the tribunal held MFA NO.102702/2014 (MV) C/w. MFA No.102703/2014 : 5 :
that there was no evidence, which was laid to rebut
the allegation, by the owner entering into the witness
box and as such imposed the entire liability on the
owner of the vehicle absolving the insurance company
of the same.
4. Shri Gurukumar V.A., learned counsel for the
appellant – owner of the vehicle would submit that it
is only by inadvertence that the said evidence could
not be laid before the Court, the driver of the vehicle
has arrayed in the charge sheet namely Pundalik Pote,
was the driver of the vehicle and as such has filed
I.A.No.2/2014 for production of additional documents,
namely notarized copy of the driving licence. The
original of the driving licence has also been made
available today for inspection and has been provided
for inspection to the learned counsel for the Insurance
Company Shri S.S.Koliwad as also to Shri Sanjay S.
Katageri, learned counsel for the claimant. On
examination of the said original licence with the photo MFA NO.102702/2014 (MV) C/w. MFA No.102703/2014 : 6 :
copy produced along with I.A.No.2/2014, it is found
that the same matches with the original today
produced. Hence, after such examination, the original
has been returned to Shri Gurukumar V.A. learned
counsel for the owner of the vehicle.
5. Considering the averments made in support of
I.A.No.2/2014, the said application not having been
objected to is allowed. The additional documents are
taken on record.
6. A perusal of the said licence produced now indicates
that it has been issued on 13.12.1983 valid till
11.08.2017 in the name of Pundalik Pote, bears DL
No.MH10 1983 00007079. The coverage under the
licence is shown to be “TRANS”, in the backside of the
licence at Sl.No.8 it indicates that “TRANS” stands for
“Transport”. In view of the same, I am of the
considered opinion that the licence which has
produced today is that of Pundlik Pote authorizing him
to drive transport vehicles from 13.12.1983 till MFA NO.102702/2014 (MV) C/w. MFA No.102703/2014 : 7 :
11.08.2017. In view of the same, the finding of the
tribunal is required to be set aside by considering the
additional document produced today.
7. The liability imposed on the owner is therefore
transferred to the Insurance Company i.e., United
India Insurance Co. Ltd., - respondent No.5 in MFA
No.102702/2014 and respondent No.2 in MFA
NO.102703/2014.
8. Both appeals are therefore allowed.
9. The amount in deposit along with accrued interest, if
any, shall be refunded to the appellant in both the
appeals.
Sd/- JUDGE Vnp*