IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF OCTOBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. SREENIVASE GOWDA M.F.A. No.2947 OF 2009 (MV) BETWEEN:
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD MANGALORE (D.K.) DULY REPRESENTED BY THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD REGIONAL OFFICE NO.2-B UNITY BUILDING ANNEXE P.KALINGA RAO ROAD (MISSION ROAD) BANGALORE – 560 027 – DULY REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER …APPELLANT (BY SRI. A.RAVISHANKAR, ADV.) AND:
1. SRI. BAIDU @ THANIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS S/O SRI.KUNDA MUGERA R/O BEDRADI BAJATHUR VILLAGE PUTTUR TALUK (D.K) 2. SRI. A. SANTHAPPA SIRIYAN SINCE DECEASED BY LRs 2a. MRS. JAYASHREE D/O A. SANTHAPPA SIRIYAN 2b. SRI. CHETAN S/O A.SANTHAPPA SIRIYAN 2c. MRS. KAVYA SHREE D/O A.SANTHAPPA SIRIYAN 2d. MRS. DIVYA SHREE D/O A.SANTHAPPA SIRIYAN 2e. MISS. NAVYA D/O A SANTHAPPA SIRIYAN ALL ARE RESIDING AT:
SHIVAKRIPA HOUSE PANEKAL VILLAGE BANDARA POST BELTHANGADY TALUK D.K. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. DEEPA J., ADV. FOR SRI. B.V.KRISHNA, ADV. FOR R1; SRI. JAGADEESH, ADV. FOR R2 (a-e)) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 15.01.2009 PASSED IN MVC NO.1440/2005 ON THE FILE OF MEMBER, MACT, PUTTUR, DAKSHINA KANNADA, AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF RS.51,200/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL DEPOSIT.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
J U D G M E N T This appeal by the insurer of offending vehicle.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. Perused the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal. With the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the appeal is heard, admitted and taken up for final disposal.
3. As there is no dispute regarding certain injuries sustained by the claimant in a road traffic accident occurred on 13.7.2005 due to rash and negligent driving of the offending jeep bearing registration No. KA-21-C-3322 by its driver and quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the only point that arises for my consideration in the appeal is:
“Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in fastening liability on the insurer of the Jeep?
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that since the driver of the offending vehicle did not posses the transport badge at the time of accident, the insurer was not liable to indemnify the owner of the vehicle and pay compensation to the claimant as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., /vs./ Angal Kol & others (2009(11) SCC 356). He submits that the Tribunal without considering this aspect of the matter has committed an error in fastening the liability on the insurer of the offending vehicle. Whereas, Smt. Deepa, learned counsel for Sri B.V. Krishna, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.1 submits that as per the latest judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Mukund Dewanger /vs./ Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., (2017 SCC 788) non possessing of transport badge by a driver is not a ground for the insurer to absolve from liability. Therefore, she submits that matter is covered by the said judgment of the Supreme Court against the appellant and prays for dismissal of the appeal. In the aforesaid judgment, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that the driver having possessed the driving licence to drive Light motor (Non-Transport) Vehicle had driven the offending vehicle which is light motor (Transport) vehicle unladen weight of which is less than 7500 KG in such case the insurer cannot absolve from its liability and matter is fully covered by the aforesaid judgment against the insurer.
Hence, the following ORDER The appeal is dismissed as devoid of merits. Amount if any deposited in the above appeal shall be transmitted to the Tribunal to disburse the same in favour of the claimants in terms of the award of the Tribunal.
No order as to costs.
SD/- JUDGE KLY/