IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.883 OF 2012 (MV) BETWEEN:
M/S SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., 10003-E-8 RIICO INDUSTRIAL AREA SITAPURA, JAIPUR RAJASTHAN-322022 REP BY ITS LEGAL OFFICER M/S SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD, NO.S-5, II FLOOR WHITE HOUSE, ST. MARKS ROAD BANGALORE REP BY ITS LEGAL OFFICER …APPELLANT (BY SHRI. H.N. KESHAVA PRASHANTH, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. SRI. BUDDI SABI S/O MASTHAN SABI RESIDING AT NO.15 5TH MAIN, 1ST CROSS RAHATMANAGAR BANGALORE 2. NARAYANASWAMY S/O RAMANNA JULAPALYA VILLAGE MITTE MARI POST BAGEPALLI TALUK CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT …RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI. A.K. VASANTH, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
V/O DATED 20.02.2015, SERVICE OF NOTICE H/S IN R/O R1) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 26.08.2011 PASSED IN MVC NO.1933/2010 ON THE FILE OF 14TH ADDITIONAL JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MEMBER MACT, BANGALORE, AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF RS.76,240/- WITH INTEREST AT 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL PAYMENT.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-
JUDGMENT Insurer has presented this appeal challenging the judgment and award dated 26.08.2011 in MVC No.1933/2010 on the file of MACT, Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru City, awarding compensation of Rs.76,240/- to the injured claimant.
2. Shri H.N.Keshava Prashanth, learned advocate for the Insurer urged a solitary contention that Insurer is not liable to indemnify the owner inasmuch as the licence of the driver of the offending vehicle did not have transport endorsement.
3. It is settled that transport endorsement is not necessary to drive a light motor vehicle (see Mukund Dewangan Vs. Oriental Insurance Company Limited1). In the instant case, the vehicle involved is a 407 Tempo and it falls within the definition of a ‘light motor vehicle’. Therefore, the solitary contention urged by the appellant fails and the appeal is accordingly dismissed.
4. The registry shall transmit the amount in deposit for disbursement in accordance with law.
Sd/- JUDGE Yn.
1 AIR 2017 SC 3668