Sri B Gangadharaiah v. Sri Muddassir Ali Khan K

((((((((((((HC-KAR, NC:(2026:KHC:39947-DB( MFA(No.(618(of(2020( ( ,,,,,,,,,, , CNR:(KAHC010481352019( ( (

IN(THE(HIGH(COURT(OF(KARNATAKA(AT(BENGALURU(

THDATED(THIS(THE(30 (DAY(OF(JULY,(2026(

PRESENT( THE(HON'BLE(MR.(JUSTICE(JAYANT(BANERJI( AND(( THE(HON'BLE(MS.(JUSTICE(TARA(VITASTA(GANJU( MISCELLANEOUS(FIRST(APPEAL(NO.(618(OF(2020((MV-D)( BETWEEN:(( (

1., SRI.,B.GANGADHARAIAH, S/O,BAGILI,ANJINAPPA,, AGED,ABOUT,74,YEARS,, ,

2., ADEMMA, W/O,B.GANGADHARAIAH,, AGED,ABOUT,70,YEARS,, ,

3., SMT.PUSHAPA, W/O,LATE,M.G.ANILKUMARA, AGED,ABOUT,34,YEARS,, Digitally signedtiby0JAI , JYOTHI0J 4., M.A.VANDANA, Location: D/O,OF,M.G.ANILKUMARA,,

High0Courttiof AGED,ABOUT,15,YEARS,, Karnataka ,

5., VESWATEJA.M.A., D/O,OF,M.G.ANIL,KUMARA,, AGED,ABOUT,10,YEARS,, , APPELLANTS,NO.4,&,5,ARE,MINORS, REPRESENTED,BY,THEIR,NATURAL,, GUARDIAN,MOTHER,THE,APPELLANT,NO.3., , ALL,ARE,R/AT,NO.127,,NIYALAYA,,, 1ST,BLOCK,,GOWRIBIDANUR,TALUK,,

((((((((((((HC-KAR, NC:(2026:KHC:39947-DB( MFA(No.(618(of(2020( ( ,,,,,,,,,, , CNR:(KAHC010481352019( ( ( CHIKKABALLAPUR,DISTRICT-561,208., …APPELLANTS, (BY,SRI.,VASANTHAPPA.,,ADVOCATE), , AND:( (

1., SRI.MUDDASSIR,ALI,KHAN.K, S/O,AZAMATHULLA,KHAN.K, R/AT,VIDYANAGAR,CROSS,, BETTAHALASUR,,CHIKKAJALA,HOBLI,,, BENGALURU,NORTH-562,157., ,

2., UNIVERSAL,SOMPO,GENERAL,, INSURANCE,COMPANY,LTD.,, K.V.D.TOWERS, NDNO.7/3,,2 ,FLOOR,,, ABOVE,BARCLAYS,FINANCE,,, OPP:,100,FEET,ROAD,,, OLD,MADRAS,ROAD,,, INDIRANAGARA,,BENGALURU-560,038., …RESPONDENTS, (BY,SRI.,S.V.HEGDE,MULKHAND.,,ADVOCATE,R2;, ,,,,,,V/O/DTD:18.09.2025-NOTICE,TO,R1-DISPENSED,WITH), ,, THIS, MFA, FILED, U/S, 173(1), OF, MV, ACT, AGAINST, THE, JUDGMENT,AND,AWARD,DATED,20.02.2018,,PASSED,IN,MVC, NO.1283/2016, ON, THE, FILE, OF, , THE, MEMBER,, MACT,, XVI, ADDITIONAL, JUDGE,, COURT, OF, SMALL, CAUES,, BENGALURU, SCCH-14,, PARTLY, ALLOWING, THE, CLAIM, PETITION, FOR, COMPENSATION, AND, SEEKING, ENHANCEMENT, OF, COMPENSATION., , THIS, APPEAL,, COMING, ON, FOR, DISMISSAL,, THIS, DAY,, JUDGMENT,WAS,DELIVERED,THEREIN,AS,UNDER:, , CORAM:, ,HON'BLE,MR.,JUSTICE,JAYANT,BANERJI, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,&, ,HON'BLE,MS.,JUSTICE,TARA,VITASTA,GANJU, ( (

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI)

Heard Shri Vasanthappa, learned counsel for the appellants and Shri S.V. Hegde Mulkhand, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2/Insurance Company.

¶2Despite service of notice on the respondent No.1, the owner, being held sufficient, there is no representation. On the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this matter is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission.

¶3The sole point being urged by the learned counsel for the appellants is that the respondent No.2 /Insurance Company has been exonerated from its liability. But the liability has been fastened only on the respondent No.1, who is the recorded owner of the offending vehicle. It is contended that as per the law settled by the Supreme Court in the year 2004 in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Swaran Singh1 that where there is an effective and valid Insurance Policy of vehicle, the Insurance Company would be liable at the first instance, to make payment

1 (2004) 3 SCC 297

of the amount of compensation and thereafter proceed to recover the same from the owner. Learned counsel has also referred to a recent judgment of the Supreme Court in Akula Narayana v. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.,2 in which the Supreme Court has held that where the contract of insurance is not disputed, even on breach of insurance conditions, recovery of compensation can be allowed from the Insurer by giving right to the Insurer to recover the same from the vehicle owner.

¶4Since the owner though served is not represented, we proceed to consider the matter accordingly. As far as the aspect of negligence and the amount of compensation is concerned, the counsel for the parties are not at issue. The Insurance Company has not filed any appeal.

¶5In this view of the matter and considering the aforesaid judgments of the Supreme Court in Swaran Singh and Akula Narayana, it is ordered that the awarded amount shall, at the first instance, be paid by the Insurance Company

2 2025 SCC OnLine SC 2377

within a period of six weeks from today and it is left open to the Insurance Company to recover the same from the recorded owner. This appeal is allowed to the extent mentioned above. The award shall accordingly be amended. The Trial Court Record shall be sent back to the concerned Court thereafter, forthwith.

Sd/- (JAYANT BANERJI) JUDGE

Sd/- (TARA VITASTA GANJU) JUDGE

KS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16