Mr. B.K.Ashraf vs Icici Lombard General Insurance ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 13118 Kant

                             1



       IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

        DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022

                         BEFORE

           THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P. SANDESH

                 M.F.A.NO.2072/2017 (MV-I)


BETWEEN:

MR. B.K.ASHRAF
S/O LATE AHAMED BEARY
AGED 33 YEARS
R/AT BOLANTHUR POST
KALPANE, HIDAYATH MANZIL
BANTWAL TALUK
PRESENTLY R/AT ZUM ZUM MANZIL
KATIPALLA, MANGALURU                     ... APPELLANT

            (BY SRI GURUPRASAD B.R., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL
       INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
       LOCAL OFFICE:
       MAXIMU BUILDING
       3RD FLOOR, NALAPAD RESIDENCY
       LIGHT HOUSE HILL ROAD
       MANGALURU-575 001
       REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER


2.     VENKATARAMANA NAYAK
       S/O VASUDEVA NAYAK
       AGED 56 YEARS
       R/AT D.NO.12-15
       NEETHINAGAR ROAD
                                 2



      NEAR ADHISHAKTHI BHAJANA MANDIR
      PADAV, SHAKTHINAGAR
      MANGALURU-575 005             ... RESPONDENTS

       (BY SRI A.N.KRISHNASWAMY, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
              NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH
               VIDE ORDER DATED 28.03.2018)


     THIS M.F.A., IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 03.09.2016
PASSED IN MVC NO.253/16 ON THE FILE OF THE 6TH
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE & MACT, D.K.,
MANGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR
COMPENSATION       AND     SEEKING    ENHANCEMENT      OF
COMPENSATION.

    THIS M.F.A., COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

                          JUDGMENT

Though this matter is listed for admission today, with the

consent of both the learned counsel it is taken up for final

disposal.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the

appellant and the learned counsel appearing for respondent

No.1/Insurance Company.

3. This appeal is filed challenging the judgment and

award dated 03.09.2016, passed in M.V.C.No.253/2016 on the

file of VI Additional District and Sessions Judge & MACT, D.K.,

Mangaluru ('the Tribunal' for short), questioning the quantum of

compensation.

4. The parties are referred to as per their original

rankings before the Tribunal to avoid confusion and for the

convenience of the Court.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant filed

an application under Order 41 Rule 27 read with Section 151 of

CPC, seeking permission to produce the additional medical bills

on the ground that the claimant subsequent to the award

admitted to the Hospital and subjected to surgery and the bills to

the tune of Rs.2,13,021/- is claimed. When the original

documents are placed before the Court with regard to the

treatment as an inpatient as well as the implants are purchased

and other bills are also produced in this regard, the matter

requires to be re-considered by the Tribunal.

6. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for

respondent No.1/Insurance Company would submit that the

veracity and authenticity of the documents has to be verified by

the Insurance Company.

7. In view of the submissions made by both the

counsel, the matter requires to be remanded to the Tribunal to

consider the matter afresh. It is the contention that the

quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is very

meager. In view of production of additional documents, the

Tribunal is directed to dispose of the matter afresh after

considering the additional documents.

8. In view of the discussions made above, I pass the

following:

ORDER

(i) The appeal is allowed.

(ii) The impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal dated 03.09.2016, passed in M.V.C.No.253/2016, is hereby set aside.

(iii) The matter is remanded to the Tribunal to consider the matter afresh.

(iv) This is the matter of the year 2017. Hence, the Tribunal is directed to dispose of the matter within six months from today.

(v) The parties and the respective counsel are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 16.12.2022 without expecting any separate notice from the Tribunal.

(vi) Both the parties and the respective counsel are directed to assist the Tribunal to dispose of the matter within the stipulated period of six months from today.

(vii) The Registry is directed to transmit the application - I.A.No.1/2022 filed under Order 41 Rule 27 read with Section 151 of CPC along with the original documents to the concerned Tribunal, forthwith to enable the Tribunal to take up the matter on 16.12.2022.

Sd/-

JUDGE

cp*