Karnataka High Court
Sri S Gopinath vs Sri Manjunath A on 22 February, 2024
Author: Pradeep Singh Yerur
Bench: Pradeep Singh Yerur
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:7685
MFA No. 2607 of 2020
C/W MFA No. 4399 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.2607 OF 2020 (MV-D)
C/W
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.4399 OF 2020(MV-D)
IN MFA NO.2607/2020:
BETWEEN:
1. SRI S.GOPINATH
S/O.LATE SELVARAJ
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS
2. SMT.VANAJJA G.
W/O.S.GOPINATH
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS
BOTH ARE R/AT NO.B-201
IISHWARYA RESIDENCY
2ND MAIN ROAD, G.P.PALYA
BENGALURU-560 075
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI R.KRISHNA REDDY, ADVOCATE)
Digitally AND:
signed by B
LAVANYA 1. SRI MANJUNATH A.
Location: S/O.ANNAYAPPA
HIGH AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
COURT OF R/AT MARAMMA TEMPLE ROAD
KARNATAKA KAMMAVARIPET, HOSAKOTE TOWN
BENGALURU RURAL DIST.-562 114
2. IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL
INSURANCE CO.LTD.
NO.41, CRISTU COMPLEX
1ST FLOOR, LAVELLE ROAD
BENGALURU
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:7685
MFA No. 2607 of 2020
C/W MFA No. 4399 of 2020
NO.141, 4TH FLOOR
SHANTHI TOWERS
III MAIN, EAST OF NGEF LAYOUT
KASTURINAGAR
BENGALURU-560 043
REP. BY ITS MANAGER
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI E.I.SANMATHI, ADVOCATE FOR R-2;
R-1 IS SERVED)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT PRAYING TO MODIFY THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 04.01.2020 PASSED IN
MVC.NO.596/2019 BY XV ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE
AND XXIII A.C.M.M., MEMEBR, MACT, BENGALURU AND ETC.
IN MFA NO.4399/2020:
BETWEEN:
M/S.IFFCO-TOKIO GENERAL
INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.
NO.41, CRISTU COMPLEX
1ST FLOOR, LAVALLE ROAD
BENGALURU
NOW AT
SC-141, SRI SHANTHI TOWERS
5TH FLOOR, 3RD MAIN
141, EAST OF NGEF LAYOUT
KASTURINAGAR
BENGALURU-560 048
REP. BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI E.I.SANMATHI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI S.GOPINATH
S/O.LATE SELVARAJ
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:7685
MFA No. 2607 of 2020
C/W MFA No. 4399 of 2020
2. SMT.VANAJJA G.
W/O.S.GOPINATH
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS
R-1 & R-2 ARE R/AT NO.B-201
IISHWARYA RESIDENCY
2ND MAIN ROAD, G.P.PALYA
BENGALURU-560 075
3. SRI MANJUNATHA A.
S/O.ANNAYAPPA
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
R/AT MARAMMA TEMPLE STREET
KAMMAVARIPET
HOSKOTE TOWN
BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562 114
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI R.KRISHNA REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R-1 & R-2;
R-3 IS SERVED)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 04.01.2020 PASSED IN
MVC.NO.596/2019 BY XV ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE
AND XXIII A.C.M.M., MEMEBR, MACT, BENGALURU AND ETC.
THESE APPEALS ARE COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING,
THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
These two appeals are preferred by the claimants as
well as the Insurance Company challenging the judgment
and award dated 04.01.2020 passed in MVC.No.596/2019
by the Court of XV Additional Small Causes Judge and
NC: 2024:KHC:7685
XXIII ACMM, Member, MACT, Bengaluru (for short, 'the
tribunal').
2. Learned counsel for claimants contends that the
claimants have expended a sum of Rs.7,54,303/- towards
medical expenses of their daughter deceased
Pratima S.G. However, the tribunal without taking into
consideration of the same, has only awarded the
compensation of Rs.1,34,408/- towards medical expenses,
which calls for interference at the hands of this Court. He
has filed statement of accounts before this Court to show
that certain amounts have been paid by claimants and
their son towards medical treatment of the deceased
Pratima S.G., who was a minor, aged 16 years.
3. Having heard learned counsel for claimants and
learned counsel for Insurance Company and perused the
impugned judgment and award, a short point that arises
for consideration in these appeals is that-
"Whether the tribunal has failed to take into
consideration the medical expenditure expended
by the claimants in a sum of Rs.7,54,303/- and
NC: 2024:KHC:7685
awarded only a sum of Rs.1,34,408/- and denied
to award the remaining amount?"
4. These factual aspects cannot be gone into by this
Court, at this stage, as the matter would require sufficient
evidence and parties would have to subject themselves for
cross-examination on such records that would be placed
before the Court. Therefore, the matters require to be
remanded back to the jurisdictional tribunal reserving
liberty to the claimants to place such material before the
tribunal.
5. During the course of argument, learned counsel
for claimants files a memo reporting the death of claimant
No.1, who died on 27.02.2023. Therefore, the legal
representatives of claimant No.1 would have to be brought
on record other than claimant No.2. The matter would
have to be adjudicated before the jurisdictional tribunal
with regard medical expenses expended by the claimants
or any other person for the treatment of the deceased,
Pratima S.G.
NC: 2024:KHC:7685
6. In the circumstances, I proceed to pass the
following:
ORDER
i) Both the appeals are allowed;
ii) The judgment and award dated 04.01.2020
passed by XV Additional Small Causes Judge and
XXIII ACMM, Member, MACT, Bengaluru in
MVC.No.596/2019 is hereby set-aside;
iii) The matters are remanded back to the
jurisdictional tribunal only to the limited purpose
of considering the medical expenses expended
towards the treatment of the deceased
Pratima S.G.;
iv) The respondents before the tribunal shall be at
liberty to adduce evidence or cross-examine
witness to elicit the truth and place all materials
before the tribunal;
v) Parties shall appear before the jurisdictional
tribunal on 20.03.2024 without awaiting any
NC: 2024:KHC:7685
further notice either from this Court or from the
tribunal;
vi) The original records shall be transmitted to the
jurisdictional tribunal forthwith.
vii) It is made clear that this Court has not expressed
any opinion on the merits of the matter.
Sd/-
JUDGE
LB
