Karnataka High Court
Dindayal Agarwal S/O Mothilal Agarwal vs The National Insurance Co Ltd on 5 August, 2008
Author: Anand Byrareddy
Bench: Anand Byrareddy
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH 1 3% $33 azsx 2393? 5? xnRxAT&xx.Ar zaxaaiéksffff-"
aArz3 THIS ?HE 5th any 3? AfiGUST»2Q§$J"G 333325 G :H A' a $33 HQfi*BéE xx'J§s?1¢$_A&é§3rs$RARfi39?G' V Higcallaaaaas Virst fippé§i:fio.3§¢?f2Q§?駧$WG EET¥EE§: O O' G' G az§a2yaL fi$ARRRL 5iG'xa?a1LL"£sA£xAL xgza RESET 35 YEARS ' '- 4 " *5"
EEE? w§L3$a_%fiH$fi,A£aEraER?3 ygaw wa.3%4; as 1133; 13?H"CR%SS $:asa§;$RR3E§¢; 'O'_=.V* ®j,g axfianucgsfizy ' '_*;-fi"~* g ...A£?ELLa§?
:33 £r:;«$a3§%§gGfifi§HAs?§ig ABVGCAEE3 1 $33 fiRT2fl§A§'1H5fiRfiE€E ca LTE §;$,,&e.121,'15~;?~1§, ;$E:,pA%$HMz"usM?LEx . 3?.fi%R£*$ Raas 1'V,"3amg§LQ§ 4&1 «. ,3¥'§?§GnEfia§ER 2 »aE£HA¥G$?£EL IEESSTRIES awn RE??§.B? THE 531%? Mfifififilflfi EIRECTGR . Mmgafifiwamn xfinugwnzaa ssrnms _AA»?uMx§R Rmafi " _ yggxyn, sxgaaaaaa-$5 ...RESPQflDEfiTS "»_f§5§i 5:1. RJJ&IPRAKE£§} AfiVD¢ATE Fax RE$PGfiBENT u'§fivi§ ~a~a--§~$* ?his appeal is filed under Saatisn 1?3{1} ef fifitfif Véhiclas Act agsinat the jmfigment aad award fiated 23.§,2Q%€ gassed ix H.¥.C.%c.49?2f$1 on the fiie af t§a Chiaf aufiga, Caurt sf Small Causes, 5 HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGHAAAQOLURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH 1 gclicg. fifiaafi ta this, tfia Sfifi cf the gg§é2l$$§>w"_ wag érivimg the vehicle and this indica¢§d %hat the aggeilant wafi the i323urm'f;_ a:r§!.'3 §:;fif£ig';:i 'of'5tLhe,__ businass and henae, the i$amrance_:am§a5g3wa$'a§t liabia ta gay thé £a&@an3atia§} 'Thé~?fiiEufi%; figs aasagtad thia raasaaimg 3£§ :§;§ ,fiis¢ié3é$ tbé tiaim. gatitiafifi an :h%V.f§§i$e§'£§%§§fifi_ that tha aggeliant baa £%§ie§{%$ éE¢%fi%g,§h§ ®egistrati¢n sartificatag"a§§vi&%;fifi§§I*d§éu$§nt3 ta shay that fbfi vabi¢¢a_figiéfi§$d t§=g'&imitéfi Camgany.
3. '=Et-- ix ifif_thié.=backgr$und, during the ganéengy ¢f t§i3_appa$i; the aggellant has filed '"a§ a§fiii¢$i§m fi§fiar"£mdar XLE Eula 2? raad with V $%€%£$fiA"1$§ J§ft Cede af' fiivii Erscgdmra, IQQS, "._ zagkfifig u§$%$i%§icn ta groéuce a :99? cf the _.4fiammr%fiq¢fi.é$d Axticlefi fif fifiavciatian cf Beekay j $:§eiw_I§§u3tziea himitefi, by' way" uf aéditianal :$v£$éh&a, which i$ fitrengiy agpaaaé by tha : &$mfi$ai far the insurer ta cantenfi that mare "§ra§ustism af capies cf 3 -fim»caiie§ fiemarandum anfi Rxtislas cf kaasaiatien at the said Comyamy $y' itself would met establish that the vehicle 5 mun LUUKI OF KARNATAKA BIG!-"19 OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HlGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH C éié &&t belanga ta tha agpaliant. ?he a§§éiiS$§>w'_ had amglfi Qggartunity ts §rqdu5e wa$§ 'éu¢& fiacuaants ts establish his ic§a§j bgf§pe ,tfi£_T} ?ri%unai. The apgeilant fiat Qévifig §ogé.§¢; ii"
i$ mat an thfi greund af laékfiaf ap§extufiit§'ifiat the aaditianal avidan£e_i3hé§Q§§t tg be firééucafi, hut, aaraly as an afta£¥t§au§fi§. V° gt 3fi v§$%?€§a¢§ éf";§$a: $fijaétian5 by the iasrnqfi ¢$u£§ai §;§"t$§:g%§éafifl§fif, tha appellant wvuid s%#% fig ;§é%§n% %§atT§§fin if it is ts be halfi th%t ihhé '§éfi§m€B§} whicn is acught ta be §r¢§mc§§, h§=it3eif $¢§ifl net establish the case '"af h%§ igggailafifi; ---------- ~:t is an appreyriata case, whié§~.:aqui:§§~_ta be ramanded tn the Tribunal ith "fué§fi%; 3é§gertunity ta tha apgellant tn '4'a§§uc% g%idéfice in thia regard. fia prejudime an < %fi§dsh;g Qmu1& ha camseé ta the resganfient if the : $$$§ is .r&mandafi .far a .fra3h fiansidaratian and fi G@flfi§ submit that in tha altarnativa, the ""a§§li£atian may he ailawaé ané tha matter' be ramaaéed an the Txibunal fur fresh sonaideratian af the matter with an mgpmrtanity t0 the 8 HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGHAAACOLURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF XARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATKKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH 1 aggaiiant ta adduce evidanca in su§§srt_f5f5fhi$4;"g saae as thg iasuranme gelicy ifi ciear3y~i$3ued:i the name of the figmgany and $9: i@y.€$é fiafi¢w@f,_} any infiividual.
5. an cansi@$ratiQgTfi _%§v . f%¢fisH; anfi tircumatancsa, tne a§y€Lla§t§fi%§¥a§"£auit in mat having §radu:ad_ a§aq§é§a _§¢&Qg§fi:3; ta the satiafaatian_ §f E%fié_ Trifi¢n%i: %fi"*a%tabli3h that aha vahiala fiafififigéfi fig g fiéfipgaf and that ha was efititlaQ §¢t'§¢mQ%%§a%§#§ a%KWéfi ¢c¢u§ant mf the flfif $2 tfigitifigV§§@tfi% $s@ident. fistwithstandinq t%i3, Vtfie .fac§'.§hat>_th¥ aggaliant has now' been '"a§i§f§§ fiécura é éaeumant ta indicate that it is g' §fis$3&ility .£h3t Ehé vehicia baiangaé ta a scm§afi§' £h%figE my" itseif i. wmulfi net clearly k, '§&m@n§t;$§e %he fact, am it wmuld we B3C§$S&fi¥ "* §%g &§e éppeilant ts afiéuse fuither evidence in :§§i% f§§&bd. It i3 tharafmza, gust and nacafisary qtha$ the agpasl ha ailawad. fihile it wcald causa "in:aav%nianca ané haraahig tn the respandant, the raxgamfiant can be afiegaateiy camyensated by awazfiing cmstg.
8 n 1,, u -an s..u-am ur muwcainlsa HEGrAfA_CC)..:lJRT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAXA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH I a. fimcardingly, the aggeai is _éil5§$$;;_*_ The awarfi mf tfie ?ribunal is get asifiéy. > Th; F matter is remanfied tw the ?:i$un§§}wi;E libe:fi$, ta th% aggaiiant ta ad§a;%_§re$§ évifien£e ifi $é far 2% the cantantian as %%§gar£s' tfi§ §§fiifile fialanging ta 3 limit§fi_g&$§§fi§fi;§fi_tha épgéilant baing am accmgani af £h3:$;éWét%§§§jg§ma cf the assidant. Th;$ §$_sa§§%fif fiéflgsyfiégfi sf cost af §.s.3,:.w.:sr3;'~ in the first inst2n¢&,wtq"§h§*rg5§a§dght;»_H7 3* 'uThe aa§&iiafi§"w¢uid mat be eatitlea ts intarasfi ff§m th§,d$té"§f the judgment imgagned "h§rai§} fi§t$ th#"di$pa3a: af aha claim patitian '§uEafian;2ifi;t§i3 juégmafit.
Sd/-ém Judge