IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JULY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR M.F.A. NO.8025 OF 2016 (MV) BETWEEN:
M/S SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., E-8, EPPIP, RIICO, SITAPURA, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN - 032 022 INDIA, NOW REPRESENTED BY M/S SHIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., NO. 5/4, 3RD FLOOR, S.V.ARCADE, BILAKAHALLI, BANNERUGHATTA MAIN ROAD, IIMB POST, BANGALORE REPTD BY ITS ASSIT.MANAGER.
... APPELLANT (By Sri.B.PRADEEP, ADV. FOR SRI. B C SHIVANNE GOWDA, ADV.) AND 1. CHIKEGOWDA S/O NINGAPPA, NOW AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/O MAVINAKERE VILLAGE, BHADRAVATHI TALUK.
2. T RAJAPPA S/O THIMMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/O 1ST CROSS, KESHAVAPURA EXTENSION, BHADRAVATHI.
... RESPONDENTS (R-1 AND R-2 ARE SERVED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:29.8.2016 PASSED IN MVC NO.857/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, JMFC, ADDITIONAL MACT-11, BHADRAVATHI, AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF RS.2,60,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 7% P.A FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ITS COMPLETE PAYMENT.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-
JUDGMENT Learned counsel for the appellant, in his usual fairness submitted that the matter is covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Mukund Dewangan Vs. Oriental Insurance Company Limited1.
2. This appeal is by the insurer against the Judgment and award passed by the Tribunal holding the insurer as liable to indemnify the owner.
3. Sri.Pradeep, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the driver of the offending vehicle did not 1 AIR 2017 SC 3368 possess valid licence as transport endorsement was not found on the licence.
4. It is settled that insurer is liable to indemnify the owner of the vehicle even though the licence of driver of offending vehicle does not contain transport endorsement. Hence, the tribunal has rightly saddled the liability on the appellant-insurer.
In view of the law laid down in Mukund Dewangan’s case (supra1), this appeal does not merit consideration and is accordingly dismissed.
No costs.
Registry is directed to transfer the amount in deposit to the Tribunal for disbursement in accordance with law.
Sd/- JUDGE ln.