B Raviraj Shetty vs Smt. Sumathi S
2022 Latest Caselaw 9720 Kant

                             1



     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU


         DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JUNE, 2022

                          BEFORE

 THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

 MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL No.117/2014 (MV-I)

BETWEEN:

B.RAVIRAJ SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS
S/O. T.JAGANNATH SHETTY
MANAGING DIRECTOR
VIKAS ENTERPRISES (MAN POWER SUPPLY)
'VAISHNAVI', SHANTHINAGAR
BIRTHI ROAD, BRAHMAVAR POST
UDUPI- 576 213                                 ...APPELLANT

(BY SMT.MAMATHA G.KULKARNI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     SMT.SUMATHI.S.
       MAJOR
       AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
       W/O. SRI SUBRAMANIAN
       R/AT NO.3159/A/1
       KONDIBETTIPATTY
       NAMAKKAL, TAMIL NADU- 600 001

2.     M/S.RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE
       COMPANY LIMITED
       SHRI LAKSHMI COMPLEX
       I FLOOR, BHARATHI OMALUR MAIN ROAD
       SWARNA PETH, SALEM
       TAMIL NADU- 600 001                  ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI D.VIJAYAKUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
    NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH V/C/O DATED: 21.02.2014)
                                2

     THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 PRAYING TO
MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 07.11.2013 PASSED
BY THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE &
ADDITIONAL MACT, UDUPI IN M.V.C.NO.402/2011.

     THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL
HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                         JUDGMENT

Heard the learned Counsel for the appellant and learned

Counsel for insurer/respondent No.2.

2. This appeal is arising out of the judgment and

award dated 07.11.2013 passed in M.V.C.No.402/2011 on the

file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge & Additional MACT,

Udupi.

3. For the purpose of convenience, the parties are

referred to as per their rank before the Tribunal.

4. The claim petition is filed by the claimant seeking

compensation of Rs.25,00,000/- which is allowed in part

awarding compensation of Rs.1,07,500/- along with interest at

the rate of 8% per annum from the date of petition till the

date of deposit of the entire compensation amount.

5. According to the claimant, he suffered the

following disabilities:

(i) 0-120 degrees of flexion in his left knee joint;

(ii) 1-110 degree of flexion, 0-10 of extension, 0-30 degrees of abduction, 0-20 degrees of adduction, 0-30 degrees of external rotation, 0-15 degrees of internal rotation movements in his right hip joint.

(iii) Grade IV power in his right hip abductors.

6. The claimant claims that he has suffered 100%

functional disability.

7. Learned Advocate for the claimant has also filed

an application under Order XLI Rule 27 read with Section 151

of CPC seeking permission of the Court to produce four

documents, namely, the certificate dated 10.03.2018 issued

by Kasturba Hospital, Manipal, letter dated 30.07.2018 issued

by United India Insurance Company, original certificate dated

23.08.2018 issued by United India Insurance Company and

also certificate issued by Vidal Health T.P.A Private Ltd.

8. The Court has perused the reasons assigned in the

affidavit for production of additional documents. The Court has

also considered the grounds urged in the appeal memo.

Perused the entire evidence on record and also the impugned

judgment. After hearing the case on merit this Court is

satisfied that the documents are necessary for adjudication of

the case on hand. Accordingly, the production of documents

is allowed.

9. Learned Counsel for the Insurance Company would

submit that since production of documents is allowed, the

insurer may be permitted to cross-examine the claimant on

those additional documents and for this reason, the matter is

required to be remanded to the Tribunal.

10. This Court is of the view that the documents

produced by the claimant as additional evidence, if admitted in

evidence by the Tribunal will have a bearing on the

compensation to be awarded. Thus, the matter requires fresh

consideration in accordance with law. Under the

circumstances, the impugned judgment and award are to be

set aside. Hence, the following:

ORDER

(i) The appeal is allowed in-part and the matter is

remanded.

(ii) The impugned judgment and award dated

07.11.2013 passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge &

Additional MACT, Udupi in M.V.C.No.402/2011 are hereby set

aside.

(iii) The matter is remanded back to the Tribunal for

fresh consideration in accordance with law.

(iv) Both the parties are at liberty to lead fresh

evidence to substantiate their respective stand.

(v) This Court has not expressed any opinion on the

merits of the matter.

(vi) It is also noticed that the claim petition was filed

in the year 2011. Since the matter is 11 years old, the

Tribunal shall give priority for disposal of this case and the

same shall be decided in accordance with law within a period

of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

(vii) Registry is directed to transmit all the records

along with the additional documents filed along with an

application to the Tribunal.

(ix) The parties are directed to appear on 15.07.2022

before the jurisdictional Tribunal without awaiting any notice.

Sd/-

JUDGE

KSR