Sri Kishore Kumar Vs. Sri Bhagath B M - Court Judgment

- 1 - NC:

2023. KHC:24185 MFA No.9748 of 2012 C/W MFA No.10997 of 2012 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE12H DAY OF JULY, 2023 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL No.9748 OF2012(MV) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.10997 OF2012(MV) IN M.F.A.NO.9748/2012 BETWEEN: UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO., LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, KRISHI BHAVAN, 6TH FLOOR, HUDSON CIRCLE, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS DEPUTY MANAGER, MR. K. CHANDRASHEKAR. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. S. KRISHNA KISHORE, ADVOCATE) AND:

1. SRI. KISHORE KUMAR, AGED ABOUT22YEARS, S/O. SRI G. VARADARAJU, RESIDING AT NO.109, SUDDAGUNTE PALYA, (JOUGUPALYA) C. V. RAMAN NAGARA POST, BANGALORE - 560 093.-. 2 - NC:

2023. KHC:24185 MFA No.9748 of 2012 C/W MFA No.10997 of 2012 2. SRI. BHAGATH B.M., MAJOR, S/O SRI. MARIGOWDA, RESIDING NO.9/2, 2ND MAIN, 2ND CROSS, SULTHANPALYA, R.T. NAGAR POST, BANGALORE - 560 032. (OWNER OF MOTOR CYCLE NO.KA-04-HB-2042) …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SURESH. M. LATUR, ADVOCATE FOR R1 (VC); VIDE ORDER

DATED911/2015, NOTICE TO R2 IS ACCEPTED BY WAY OF PAPER PUBLICATION) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S1731) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT

AND AWARD DATED2407.2012 PASSED IN MVC NO.4483/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE14H ADDITIONAL JUDGE, MACT, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU, AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF RS.1,70,680/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL PAYMENT AND ETC., IN M.F.A.NO.10997/2012 BETWEEN: SRI. KISHORE KUMAR, S/O SRI. G. VARADARAJU, AGED ABOUT21YEARS, OCC: SALESMAN, R/O NO.109, SUDDAGUNTEPALYA, (JOGUPALYA), C.V. RAMAN NAGAR POST, BANGALORE - 560 093. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SURESH. M. LATUR, ADVOCATE) - 3 - NC:

2023. KHC:24185 MFA No.9748 of 2012 C/W MFA No.10997 of 2012 AND:

1. SRI. BHAGATH B.M., S/O SRI. MARIGOWDA, R/O NO.9/2, 2ND MAIN, 2ND CROSS, SULTHANPALYA, R.T. NAGAR POST, BANGALORE - 560 032.

2. THE REGIONAL MANAGER UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO., LTD., KRISHI BHAVAN, 6TH FLOOR, HUDSON CIRCLE, BANGALORE - 01. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S. KRISHNA KISHORE, ADVOCATE FOR R2 (PH); VIDE ORDER

DATED1108/2015, NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S1731) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT

AND AWARD DATED2407.2012 PASSED IN MVC NO.4483/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE14H ADDITIONAL JUDGE, MACT, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENATION AND ETC., THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: - 4 - NC:

2023. KHC:24185 MFA No.9748 of 2012 C/W MFA No.10997 of 2012 JUDGMENT

MFA No.9748/2012 is filed by the Insurance Company challenging the Judgment and Award dated 24.07.2012 passed in MVC No.4483/2011 by the MACT and Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru city (SCCH-10), by contending that the motor-cycle No.KA-04-HB-2042 is not involved in the accident and falsely implicated into the case for the purpose of making claim against the Insurance Company. MFA No.10997/2012 is filed by the claimant seeking enhancement of compensation.

2. Brief facts of the case are that on 13.04.2011 at about 10.45 a.m., when the claimant – Kishore Kumar was riding the motor cycle bearing Reg. No.KA-03-ER-8755 (hereinafter called as ‘Motor Cycle No.8755’) on DRDO Main Road, Bangalore, another motor cycle bearing Reg. No.KA-04-HB-2042 (hereinafter called as ‘Motor Cycle No.2042’) came from opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner and dashed the claimant’s motor cycle.-. 5 - NC:

2023. KHC:24185 MFA No.9748 of 2012 C/W MFA No.10997 of 2012 Claimant sustained grievous injuries and was admitted to the hospital. Thereafter, he filed a claim petition seeking compensation.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the Insurance Company as well as the claimants.

4. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company submitted that the motor cycle No.2042 has not caused the accident as it is not involved in the accident, but falsely implicated in the case only for the purpose of making claim against the Insurance Company. It is further submitted that the claimant was riding the motor cycle No.8755, had fallen from the bike and his right foot was struck in the right foot rest. The claimant sustained injury to the foot as described in the wound certificate, other medical records and as per the photographs. As per MLC intimation-Ex.P7 issued by HOSMAT Hospital, there is no mentioning of motor bike No.2042 and simply it is stated as RTA as per the information given by claimant himself. Later, bike No.2042 is written on the back side of - 6 - NC:

2023. KHC:24185 MFA No.9748 of 2012 C/W MFA No.10997 of 2012 the wound certificate, which means the motor cycle No.2042 is not involved in the accident, but by inserting motor cycle No.2042 at a later stage, it is falsely implicated into the case. It is further submitted that on scrutiny of medical evidence-Ex.P11 and Ex.P12, it is seen that false claim has been made against the Insurance Company by showing motor bike No.2042 was involved in the accident. In this regard, the Tribunal has not appreciated the material on record correctly. Hence, learned counsel for the Insurance Company prays to allow the appeal by setting aside the Judgment and Award of the Tribunal as illegal.

5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the claimant submitted that from Ex.P7-MLC intimation issued by Chinmaya Mission Hospital, two vehicles involved in the accident are mentioned clearly. It is further submitted that claimant was firstly admitted to Chinmaya Mission Hospital and it had issued Ex.P7-MLC intimation, which has to be believed. It is further submitted that in the - 7 - NC:

2023. KHC:24185 MFA No.9748 of 2012 C/W MFA No.10997 of 2012 complaint, it is alleged that the motor cycle No.2042 had caused the accident and therefore, the Police after investigation, have filed charge sheet against the rider of the motor cycle No.2042 and the rider of the motor cycle No.2042 had pleaded guilty before the criminal court. Hence, all these evidence prove that the motor cycle No.2042 was involved in the accident and in the said accident, the claimant had sustained injuries. It is submitted that it is false to state that the claimant had fallen from the bike and sustained injuries. Therefore, the Tribunal is correct in appreciating the evidence on record, which needs no interference. He prays to dismiss the appeal filed by the Insurance Company and to allow the appeal filed by the claimant by enhancing the compensation amount.

6. Learned counsel for the claimant has relied upon the following citations in this regard:

1. VEERAPPA AND ANOTHER VS. SIDDAPPA AND ANOTHER (ILR2009KAR3562 - 8 - NC:

2023. KHC:24185 MFA No.9748 of 2012 C/W MFA No.10997 of 2012 2. JAI PRAKASH VS. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED AND OTHERS (2010 2 SCC607 3. BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED vs. B.C.KUMAR AND ANOTHER (ILR2009KAR2921 4. NORTH WEST KARNATAKA ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION VS. GOURABAI AND OTHERS (2009 15 SCC165 5. GENERAL INSURANCE COUNCIL AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF A.P. AND OTHERS (AIR2007SC2696 7. Upon hearing the rival submissions by the learned counsel for the respective parties, the point that arises for my consideration is: “Whether, under the facts and circumstances involved in the case, the claimant proves that he has sustained injuries due to the - 9 - NC:

2023. KHC:24185 MFA No.9748 of 2012 C/W MFA No.10997 of 2012 rash and negligent riding of the motor-cycle No.2042 by its rider?.

8. In the present case, it is an averment in the claim petition that the claimant was riding the motor cycle No.8755 on DRDO main road near GTRE Company, Bengaluru on 13.04.2011 at 10.45 a.m., and at that time, the rider of another motor-cycle No.2042 by coming from opposite direction with high speed in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against the claimant’s motor cycle and due to it, the claimant had sustained injuries on the right foot. Therefore, as per the claimant, the offending vehicle is motor cycle No.2042. When there is a serious dispute regarding involvement of the offending vehicle in these nature of proceedings, the evidence on record both oral and documentary are to be considered on the principle of preponderance of probabilities rather to approach the theory of beyond reasonable doubt as it is in vogue in dealing with criminal cases. What is the probable evidence available on the face of the record has to be considered - 10 - NC:

2023. KHC:24185 MFA No.9748 of 2012 C/W MFA No.10997 of 2012 and this probability means that evidence which carries more weightage can be believed. The exercise of appreciation of evidence on the principle of preponderance of probabilities is weighing and sifting the evidence on record to come to a conclusion in ordinary way which is believable, it means which evidence is more probable compared to the other. Therefore, for the appreciation of evidence in civil nature of cases like in the present claim proceedings, the probability of evidence either ‘yes’ or ‘no’ is very minimal. The gap between ‘yes’ or ‘no’ is very thin compared to the appreciation of evidence in criminal cases. Therefore, on this principle of appreciation of evidence on preponderance of probabilities, the evidence in the present case has to be considered. Admittedly, the accident has taken place on 13.04.2011 morning at 10.45 a.m. First Information Statement is filed before the police on 20.04.2011. Therefore, the first information statement is filed before the Police after seven days after the date of the accident. Quite naturally, all the Police documents are formed subsequent to lodging the F.I.R. Therefore, - 11 - NC:

2023. KHC:24185 MFA No.9748 of 2012 C/W MFA No.10997 of 2012 appreciation of evidence on record on the touch-stone of preponderance of probabilities requires that soon after the accident and at an undisputed point of time, what factors lead to the accident has to be considered. Admittedly, the claimant has taken treatment in two hospitals, viz., Chinamaya Mission Hospital, Bengaluru, for taking first-aid treatment and then, on the very same day, the claimant was shifted to Hosmat Hospital, Bengaluru for higher treatment. When the claimant was admitted in these two hospitals, he was in an oriented state of mind not having lost consciousness. Ex.P7 is the MLC intimation of Chinmaya Mission hospital written on 13.04.2011 itself and the MLC intimation is part of Ex.P12-case sheet. Inpatient record is also written on 13.04.2011. Therefore, there are two MLC intimations as per Exs.P7 and Ex.P12. These two MLC intimations Ex.P7 and Ex.P12 prove that the Police have received MLC intimation from the hospital on 15.04.2011 itself. Even though the Police have received these two MLC intimations, the Police have not visited either of the hospitals to check available record in - 12 - NC:

2023. KHC:24185 MFA No.9748 of 2012 C/W MFA No.10997 of 2012 the first information statement of the claimant who was admitted in the hospital. It is the bounden duty of the concerned Police, soon after the receipt of medico-legal case intimation from the hospital, to go to the hospital and meet the accused and receive first information statement either from the claimant or from the attendant of injured claimant and get the F.I.S registered as first information report as per Section 156 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. But the Police in this regard have failed in their duty to record first information statement either from the claimant or from the attendant in the hospital. The inaction on the part of the Police is resulting in hindrance to find out the truth involved in the case and may perhaps result into fabrication/manipulation of the case. Therefore, in this regard, certain necessary directions are to be issued to the Police which will be discussed at a later stage.

9. In Ex.P7-MLC intimation issued by Chinmaya Mission Hospital, names of two motor-cycles are written - 13 - NC:

2023. KHC:24185 MFA No.9748 of 2012 C/W MFA No.10997 of 2012 along with registration numbers, which can be found at the top of the intimation. Though there is a column for mentioning brief details of the case, the said motor-cycle numbers are not mentioned in the said column, but it is written on the top of the intimation which is found blank. In that column, brief details of the case are found mentioning “History of RTA” without mentioning numbers of the motor-cycles. Thus, Ex.P7-MLC intimation is received from the Police on 15.04.2011 as per Ex.P7. Ex.P12 is the out-patient record from the Hosmat Hospital in which MLC intimation is a part of Ex.P12. This MLC intimation from the HOSMAT Hospital is dated 13.04.2011, with time mentioned as 3.00 p.m., but received from the Police on 15.04.2011. In this Ex.P12-MLC intimation, it is only mentioned as alleged history of RTA on 13.04.2011 at 10.30 a.m. It is not disputed that the claimant initially was admitted to Chinmaya Mission Hospital. There he has taken first aid treatment and then, shifted to Hosmat Hospital on the very same day for higher treatment. When there is a difference in these two MLC intimations, - 14 - NC:

2023. KHC:24185 MFA No.9748 of 2012 C/W MFA No.10997 of 2012 then the other evidence are to be considered. The other evidence is the oral evidence of the doctor of Hosmat Hospital examined as P.W.2. P.W.2 in the cross- examination admitted that on 13.04.2011, the Hosmat Hospital has intimated MLC to the concerned police station. Further, it is deposed that as per Ex.P12, the petitioner has sustained injuries due to fall from the two- wheeler and the said intimation is marked as Ex.P12(a). Further, P.W.2 had stated that as per hospital records and MLC intimation, it is not mentioned regarding involvement of other vehicle in Ex.P12. Ex.P12(a) is the averment of the brief information furnished and written down in the accident and trauma chart as it has to be filled by the doctor soon after entry of injured to the hospital. In the said Ex.P12(a), information is mentioned as provided by the claimant himself. Therefore, since the claimant is an injured person as discussed above, there is no loss of consciousness and hence, the claimant himself has given brief information to the hospital when he was conscious, which is mentioned as below: - 15 - NC:

2023. KHC:24185 MFA No.9748 of 2012 C/W MFA No.10997 of 2012 Alleged H/O RTA on 13/14/2011 @ 10:30 am near C.V. Raman Nagar. If sustained fall from 2 wheeler and sustained injury to ® foot which got caught in a foot rest.

10. Ex.P11 is the inpatient record of Hosmat Hospital which reads as under:

1. Deep CLW over sole of right foot extending from fore –foot to mid –foot medial aspect.

2. Underline muscles cut and exposed 3. Moderate contamination 4. CLW over base of right little toe extending from dorsal to plantar aspect.

5. Blackish discoloration of little tor (?. hematoma) 6. Swelling and tenderness overall metatarsal 7. ROM- painful and restricted 8. No distal NVD11 Therefore, as per Ex.P11, Ex.P12 and Ex.P12(a), simple brief information is given that the claimant fell from two-wheeler and sustained injuries to right foot. Ex.P10 are the photographs with negative produced by the claimant himself and it shows that the claimant had sustained injury to the bottom of the foot. In Ex.P11, - 16 - NC:

2023. KHC:24185 MFA No.9748 of 2012 C/W MFA No.10997 of 2012 there is a mentioning of the nature of injuries suffered by the claimant along with a drawing of the foot showing on which part the claimant has sustained injuries. This is corroborated by Ex.P10-photographs. Therefore, upon appreciating this evidence on record, Ex.P12-MLC intimation is found to be more probable to Ex.P7-MLC intimation, for the reason that the mentioning of motor- cycle number in Ex.P7 is at a place which is not supposed to be mentioned. Furthermore, upon considering the nature of injuries sustained as stated in Ex.P10- photographs and Ex.P11-MLC intimation, the right foot of the claimant was struck in the foot rest. Therefore, if foot is struck in the foot-rest of the motor-cycle as stated in Ex.P10, Ex.P11 and Ex.P12, then there is a likelihood of sustaining injuries as stated in Ex.P10 and Ex.P11. Therefore, upon analysis of this evidence and after weighing and sifting the evidence on record, the contention of the Insurance Company is found to be more probable to the contention urged by the claimant.-. 17 - NC:

2023. KHC:24185 MFA No.9748 of 2012 C/W MFA No.10997 of 2012 12. If the Police, after receipt of MLC intimation, have visited either of the hospitals and have taken first information statement and registered F.I.R at that initial point of time only, then the truth would have been revealed regarding involvement of the motor-cycle No.2042. A duty is cast on the part of the Police to record first information statement immediately when an offence is committed resulting in filing of the case as discussed above and this is a burning issue so far as motor vehicle accident cases are concerned. Conducting spot mahazar, preparing spot sketch and motor vehicle inspection report and filing charge sheet are consequent effect of filing of first information statement before the Police. Just because the rider has pleaded guilty and paid fine amount before the Tribunal, is not always a ground to say that the alleged offending vehicle is involved in the accident. As discussed above, the Tribunal has to consider the case on the basis of evidence produced before it by not being influenced by the evidence given in the criminal case before the Court of Magistrate. The Tribunal is an independent Forum. It has - 18 - NC:

2023. KHC:24185 MFA No.9748 of 2012 C/W MFA No.10997 of 2012 to consider the evidence led before it rather than depending on what has happened in the criminal case. The evidence produced before the criminal case are relevant only if the relevancy of the documents are admissible in the context of appreciation of evidence on record. Then only the documents produced in the criminal case can be relied if the factum of accident stated in the claim petition is proved to be believable. Therefore, the relevancy of the documents has to be appreciated independently on the basis of the evidence produced before the Tribunal, not depending on the findings in criminal case mechanically.

13. In the present case, first information statement is lodged on 20.04.2011 after seven days from the date of accident. Therefore, while considering the case on all its preponderance of probabilities, as in the present claim proceedings, one of the foremost thing is to consider and appreciate what would have happened at the very initial point of time and at undisputed point of time, that gives - 19 - NC:

2023. KHC:24185 MFA No.9748 of 2012 C/W MFA No.10997 of 2012 some picture regarding the accident and involvement of vehicles.

14. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has issued guidelines to the Claims Tribunals as per the decision of JAI PRAKASH VS. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED AND OTHERS [(2010) 2 SCC607 in this regard. The relevant paragraph No.21 is extracted below:

21. For complying with Section 166(4) of the Act, the jurisdictional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunals shall initiate the following steps: (a) The Tribunal shall maintain an institution register for recording the AIRs which are received from the Station House Officers of the police stations and register them as miscellaneous petitions. If any private claim petitions are directly filed with reference to an AIR, they should also be recorded in the register. (b) The Tribunal shall list the AIRs as miscellaneous petitions. It shall fix a date for preliminary hearing so as to enable the police to notify such date to the victim (family of the victim in the event of death) and the owner, driver and insurer of the vehicle involved in the accident. Once the claimant(s) appear, the miscellaneous application shall be converted to claim petition. Where a claimants) file the claim petition even before the receipt of the AIR by the Tribunal, the AIR may be tagged to the claim petition. (c) The Tribunal shall enquire and satisfy itself that the AIR relates to a real accident and is not the result of any - 20 - NC:

2023. KHC:24185 MFA No.9748 of 2012 C/W MFA No.10997 of 2012 collusion and fabrication of an accident (by any "police officer-advocate-doctor" nexus, which has come to light in several cases). (d) The Tribunal shall by a summary enquiry ascertain the dependent family members/legal heirs. The jurisdictional police shall also enquire and submit the names of the dependent legal heirs. (e) The Tribunal shall categorise the claim cases registered, into those where the insurer disputes liability and those where the insurer does not dispute the liability. (f)Wherever the insurer does not dispute the liability under the e policy, the Tribunal shall make an endeavour to determine the compensation amount by a summary enquiry or refer the matter to the Lok Adalat for settlement, so as to dispose of the claim petition itself, within a time-frame not exceeding six months from the date of registration of the claim petition. (g) The insurance companies shall be directed to deposit the admitted amount or the amount determined, with the Claims Tribunals within 30 days of determination. The Tribunals should ensure that the compensation amount is kept in a fixed deposit and disbursed as per the directions contained in Kerala SRTC v. Susamma Thomas3. (h) As the proceedings initiated in pursuance of Sections 158(6) and 166(4) of the Act are different in nature from an application by the 9 victim(s) under Section 166(1) of the Act, Section 170 will not apply. The insurers will therefore be entitled to assist the Tribunal (either independently or with the owners of the vehicles) to verify the correctness about the accident, injuries, age, income and dependants of the deceased victim and in determining the quantum of compensation - 21 - NC:

2023. KHC:24185 MFA No.9748 of 2012 C/W MFA No.10997 of 2012 15. Even though the Tribunal has mentioned these two Judgments relied on by the Insurance Company, they are not considered by mentioning only one reason that the said decisions are not applicable in the case. The Tribunal has expected the Insurance Company to lead negative evidence that the motor cycle No.2042 was not involved in the accident. It cannot be expected in judicial proceedings to prove negative facts of denial. What is not there, simply it means it does not exist. A person who asserts the fact, has to discharge his burden in proving the facts. Therefore, expecting the Insurance Company to lead negative evidence is not a correct approach. It is the bounden duty of the claimant to discharge his burden of proving the involvement of the offending vehicle by leading cogent, believable and reliable evidence. In this claim proceedings, simply relying on the Police records is not sufficient. The genesis of Police document is based on the first information statement. But before that it has to be considered much water has flown. If soon after accident, first information statement is recorded and F.I.R - 22 - NC:

2023. KHC:24185 MFA No.9748 of 2012 C/W MFA No.10997 of 2012 is registered, then that would have been considered if there is no other contra-evidence. But in this case, there is a delay of seven days in lodging first information statement. But before that there are evidence from the medical documents as discussed above, regarding involvement of the vehicle as alleged in the present case. Therefore, upon considering and appreciating the evidence on record and upon proper weighing and sifting of the evidence as discussed above, the contention/case put forward by the Insurance Company is found to be more probable compared to the case/contention put forward by the claimant.

16. Therefore, the Insurance Company succeeds in their contention that motor cycle No.2042 was not involved in the accident and the claimant while riding the motor cycle No.8755, fell on his own and sustained injuries. Therefore, the Insurance Company is not liable to pay the compensation to the claimant.-. 23 - NC:

2023. KHC:24185 MFA No.9748 of 2012 C/W MFA No.10997 of 2012 17. In the context of the case as discussed above, in innumerable cases, while dealing with the cases of this nature, where hospital authorities and police are not complying with legal requirement resulting into generating false and frivolous cases before the Courts/Tribunals, therefore, certain directions are issued to the Police and hospital authorities: i) After the accident, if the injured are admitted to the Hospital/Community Health Centre/Primary Health Centre whatever may be either in Government hospital or in private hospital, the doctors or concerned official or staff of the hospitals shall immediately write down the brief information regarding the accident by mentioning the nature and number of vehicles involved in the accident. The paramount thing to be mentioned in the said brief information is road traffic accident and involvement of the vehicles along with its - 24 - NC:

2023. KHC:24185 MFA No.9748 of 2012 C/W MFA No.10997 of 2012 number and nature. If the injured/attendant is not able to mention the number of vehicles, then the nature of the vehicles must be recorded. ii) Soon after recording the brief information regarding the accident as above stated and after giving medical treatment to the injured and bringing the injured to a stable health condition, then, within a reasonable time, the hospital authorities shall send medico-legal case (MLC) intimation to the jurisdictional police station and obtain acknowledgement from the concerned police station and keep it in in-patient record. iii) The concerned jurisdictional police station soon after receipt of the Medico-legal case intimation from the hospital, it shall be recorded in a separate Register by mentioning the registration number of the vehicle, - 25 - NC:

2023. KHC:24185 MFA No.9748 of 2012 C/W MFA No.10997 of 2012 nature/class of the vehicle, date and time of accident and date and time of receipt of intimation. In this regard, Inspector General of Police/Chief of Police in the State is directed to issue circular to all the police stations in the State of Karnataka to maintain separate Register and record in the Register by formulating separate columns with headings like date of accident, date of receipt of MLC intimation, name of hospital, from whom received, registration number of vehicles (if furnished) involved in the accident and nature/class of vehicle etc., and other relevant informations. iv) Soon after receipt of MLC intimation from the hospital and mentioning the particulars in the register maintained as above directed, then the Police shall visit the hospital and record First Information Statement (FIS) - 26 - NC:

2023. KHC:24185 MFA No.9748 of 2012 C/W MFA No.10997 of 2012 from the injured or attendant of the injured/deceased person or from hospital staff/doctors and then register First Information Report (FIR) and proceed with the case as per law.

18. The Hon'ble Supreme court in Jai Prakash’s case supra and in GOUHAR MOHAMMAD vs. UTTAR PRADESH ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORTAION [(2023) 4 SCC381 has issued certain guidelines to the Police, Hospitals, Insurance Companies and Claims Tribunal, for necessary compliance.

19. The above said directions of Hon’ble Supreme Court and of this Court shall be construed as directions of law under Section 166 of the Indian Penal Code. Therefore, non-compliance of directions above stated are punishable if there is a violation of direction and entails punishment as per the above provision of law.

20. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:- - 27 - NC:

2023. KHC:24185 MFA No.9748 of 2012 C/W MFA No.10997 of 2012 ORDER

i. MFA No.9748/2012 filed by the Insurance Company is allowed. ii. MFA No.10997/2012 filed by the claimant is dismissed. iii. The judgment and award passed by the Tribunal in MVC No.4483/2011 dated 24.07.2012 by the Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru city, is hereby set aside. iv. The amount deposited by the Insurance Company shall be refunded to the Insurance Company. v. Registry is directed to return the Trial Court Records to the Tribunal, along with certified copy of the order passed by this Court within a period of three months. vi. No order as to costs. vii. Draw award accordingly. viii. The other observations and findings of the Tribunal are kept intact. The Registrar General is directed to forward a copy of this order to the Inspector General of Police/Chief of Police - 28 - NC:

2023. KHC:24185 MFA No.9748 of 2012 C/W MFA No.10997 of 2012 in the State so as to issue necessary circulars in compliance of directions above stated and also to the Deputy Commissioner of each District in the State so as to circulate to all the Hospitals/Community Health Centers/ Primary Health Centres for necessary compliance. Violations of above stated directions entail for taking penal actions against the concerned officials as per Section 166 of Indian Penal Code. Sd/- JUDGE BNV/MH CT: AVB