Karnataka High Court
Sadashiv S/O. Pirappa @ Peerappa ... vs Ajay S/O. Dattatrya Patil on 5 April, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6187
MFA No. 104566 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 104566 OF 2018 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
SADASHIV S/O. PIRAPPA @ PEERAPPA SANGANATTI,
AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE & COOLIE,
PRESENT NIL, R/O. SHIVAPUR,
TQ: GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. N. L. BATAKURKI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. AJAY S/O. DATTATRYA PATIL,
AGE: 30 YERS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O. 1091/E-WARD, CHAVVA CHOWK,
LINE BAZAR, KASABA BAWADA,
TQ: KARAVEER, DIST: KOLHAPUR,
MAHARASHTRA.
2. THE REGIONAL MANAGER (TP HUB),
Digitally signed THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD,
by JAGADISH T # SRINATH BUILDING, 2ND FLOOR,
R NEW COTTON MARKET, HUBBALLI.
Location: HIGH
COURT OF ...RESPONDENTS
KARNATAKA (BY SRI. R. S. ARANI, ADV. FOR R2;
NOTICE TO R1 SERVED)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT,
PRAYING TO MODIFY THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND AWARD
PASSED IN M.V. C NO.4/2018 ON THE FILE OF PRL. SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE, & J.M.F.C AND M.A.C.T-IX, MUDHOL DATED 18.09.2018 AND
TO ENHANCE THE AMOUNT OF COMPENSATION FROM RS. 2,60,898/-
TO RS. 12,60,898/- BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL WITH COSTS IN THE
INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6187
MFA No. 104566 of 2018
JUDGMENT
Though this appeal is listed for admission, with the
consent of learned counsel for the parties, it is taken up for
final disposal.
2. This appeal is filed by the injured/claimant seeking
enhancement of compensation being aggrieved by the
judgment and award dated 18.09.2018 passed in
MVC.No.4/2018 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge & JMFC and
MACT-IX, Mudhol (for short, 'Tribunal').
3. Heard Sri.N.L.Batakurki, learned counsel for the
appellant-injured and Sri.R.S.Arani, learned counsel for the
respondent-insurance company.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
Tribunal has committed grave error in assessing the income as
well as the disability and the award of the compensation by the
Tribunal is on the lower side. He submits that the appellant
undergone further surgery and he got admitted on 27.12.2021
and took treatment in Ganga Surgical and fracture clinic, Gokak
and incurred substantial amount of more than Rs.2,50,000/-.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6187
He submits that further medical treatment records are placed
along with the application I.A.No.1/2023, hence, the same may
be considered & appropriate compensation may be awarded to
the injured.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-
insurance company supports the impugned judgment and
award passed by the Tribunal and submits that the Tribunal is
justified in assessing the income and disability and awarded
just and fair compensation to the appellant-injured. He opposed
the application I.A.No.1/2023 in vehemence and submits that
the accident in question has taken place on 25.03.2017 and
now the appellant has come up before this Court saying that he
has re-admitted on 27.12.2021 and taken treatment for the
accidental injuries took place on 25.03.2017. Hence, it would
be difficult for the Court to believe the genuineness of the
subsequent treatment taken by the appellant and the
documents produced. Hence, he seeks to dismiss the appeal.
6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and
perused the material available on record.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6187
7. It is not in dispute that the appellant met with a
road accident on 25.03.2017 and sustained fractural injuries. In
support of his claim, he entered the witness box and examined
himself as PW-1 and also examined Dr.S.V.Kanakaraddi as PW-
2 and produced the documents as Exs.P-1 to P-58. The
insurance company has not adduced any evidence. Considering
the evidence available on record the Tribunal awarded total
compensation of Rs.2,60,289/- along with interest at 6% p.a.
8. This Court, on re-appreciation of the evidence, is of
the considered view that the Tribunal has committed an error in
assessing the income, hence, required to re-assess the entire
compensation. Insofar as production of additional documents
in the appeal is concerned, unless the appellant is produced
these documents before the Tribunal and mark the same with
an opportunity to the respondent to cross-examine the witness
on those documents, it would be difficult for this Court to
accept the documents on record and consider the same for
award of compensation, in view of the fact that there is
enormous delay between the date of accident and the bills
produced by the appellant.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6187
9. Hence, this Court, without expressing any opinion
with regard to acceptance or rejection of the bills produced by
the appellant, is of the considered view that interest of justice
would be met if the matter is remanded back to the Tribunal
with a direction to provide an opportunity to the claimant to
adduce further evidence in order to prove his claim and permit
him to produce the additional documents and permit the
respondent-insurance company to cross-examine the witness
on the additional evidence & additional documents and
thereafter the Tribunal shall consider the claim petition on
merits and determine the compensation based on the material
available on record.
10. For the aforementioned reasons, this Court
proceeds to pass the following:
ORDER
a) Appeal is allowed.
b) The impugned judgment and award dated
18.09.2018 passed in MVC.No.4/2018 by the
Principal Senior Civil Judge & JMFC and
MACT-IX, Mudhol is set-aside and the matter
is remanded back to the Tribunal with a
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6187
direction to permit the appellant-claimant to
adduce additional documents.
c) The respondent-insurance company is at
liberty to cross-examine the witness on the
additional documents and thereafter the
Tribunal shall consider the claim petition on
merits and determine the compensation
based on the material available on record and
to dispose of the claim petition as early as
possible.
d) The appellant is permitted to take back the
original records produced along with
I.A.No.1/2023 to enable him to place the
same before the Tribunal by substituting the
same with Xerox copies.
e) In view of disposal of the main appeal,
pending interlocutory application do not
survive for consideration.
Sd/-
JUDGE
BSR
Ct-an
