Karnataka High Court
Iffco Tokio Generalf Insurance vs Ravi And Anr on 31 July, 2024
Author: N.S.Sanjay Gowda
Bench: N.S.Sanjay Gowda
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:5523
MFA No. 201687 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JULY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO. 201687 OF 2017 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
IFFCO TOKIO GENERALF INSURANCE
CO. LTD.,
THROUGH ITS BRANCH MANAGER,
CLAIMS DEPARTMENT,
HEAD CUSTOMER SERVICE CENTER, KSCMF
BUILDING, 3RD FLOOR,
3RD BLOCK, CUNNINGHAM ROAD,
BANGALORE-
(NOW REPRESENTED BY AUTHORIZED
SIGNATORY, BANGALORE).
...APPELLANT
Digitally signed (BY SMT. PREETI PATIL MELKUNDI, ADVOCATE)
by SUMITRA
SHERIGAR
Location: HIGH AND:
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
1. RAVI S/O IRAPPA CHAVAN,
AGE: 18 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE,
NOW MAJOR,
R/O: BALICHAKRA DODDA TANDA,
TQ & DIST: YADGIR-585201.
2. GOPAL @ GOPYA
S/O KASANYA RATHOD
AGE: 37 YEARS,
OCC: OWNER OF TRACTOR AND TROLLEY
BEARING NO.KA-33/T-9492 AND 9493,
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:5523
MFA No. 201687 of 2017
R/O. BALICHAKRA SANNA TANDA,
TQ & DIST: YADGIR-585201.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI VEERANAGOUDA MALIPATIL, ADV. FOR R1;
NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, PRAYING TO
SETTING ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED 20.07.2017 IN MVC NO.99/2015 PASSED BY THE
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT AT YADGIRI.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA)
1. The insurance company is in appeal challenging the award of Rs.6,51,000/- granted by the Tribunal for the injuries caused to the claimant, a 16 year old boy.
2. It is the case of the insurance company that it would not be liable to pay the compensation since the driver of the tractor did not possess a valid and effective driving license. The Tribunal has, however, not accepted this -3- NC: 2024:KHC-K:5523 MFA No. 201687 of 2017 contention on the ground that the insurance company failed to establish this assertion.
3. The other contention advanced by the insurance company is that the trailer was not insured and therefore, on the basis of the insurance policy given in favour of the tractor, the liability cannot be fastened on it.
4. The Tribunal taking note of the fact that even if the contention of the insurance company was to be accepted regarding the driver of the Tractor not possessing a driving licence, that would clearly amount to violation of the policy conditions.
5. In light of the Full Bench decision of this Court in New India Assurance Company Limited vs. Yallavva and another, ILR 2020 KAR 2239,, this would amount to a breach of policy conditions, in which event, the insurance company would have to satisfy the compensation and thereafter, proceed to recover from the owner of the offending vehicle.
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:5523 MFA No. 201687 of 2017
6. Thus, in this case, it would be appropriate to hold that the insurance company would be liable to satisfy the compensation and thereafter, proceed to recover the same from the owner of the offending vehicle and establish that the tractor was being driven by a person who did not possess a valid and effective driving licence.
7. As far as the contention that the trailer was not insured and therefore, the insurance given to the tractor cannot be utilized to fasten the liability on it is concerned, it is to be noticed here that the trailer has no independent existence when it is in use with the tractor. It is essentially the use of the tractor, which makes the trailer mobile, which in turn, causes the accident.
8. It is therefore clear that the accident occurred as a result of the use of the tractor, which in turn resulted in the trailer becoming mobile, which had been insured. Hence, the insurance company would be liable to pay the compensation for an accident arising out of the use of the tractor even if an uninsured trailer is attached to it. -5-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:5523 MFA No. 201687 of 2017
9. Subject to the above clarification, the appeal is dismissed.
10. The amount in deposit, if any, shall be transferred to the Tribunal for disbursal in terms of the award.
11. In view of the disposal of the appeal, all pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of.
Sd/-
(N.S.SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE RK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 63