Karnataka High Court
Sri Satish T vs The Superintendent Of Police on 7 August, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:30707
MFA No. 2385 of 2016
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 2385/2016 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
SRI SATISH T,
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS,
CPC NO. 1405,
AGUMBE POLICE STATION,
R/O 1ST CROSS, II MAIN, KASHIPURA,
SHIVAMOGGA - 577 201.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. PRASHANTH H S., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
SAGAR ROAD, OPPOSITE TO MC GENN HOSPITAL,
SHIVAMOGGA,
Digitally OWNER OF TEMPO TRAVELLER.
signed by
MADHURI S 2. SRI KIRAN MORE,
Location: S/O HANUMANTHA NAIKA,
High Court of AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS,
Karnataka CPC NO. 1320, AGUMBE ANS CROSS,
THIRTHALLI TALUK,
SHIVAMOGGA-577 432.
3. KARNATAKA GOVERNMENT
INSURANCE DEPARTMENT,
MOTOR BRANCH, V.V. TOWER,
DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDI,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:30707
MFA No. 2385 of 2016
HC-KAR
BY ITS DIRECTOR,
POLICY NO. 1210005.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. R.A. MACHAKANUR, AGA FOR R1 & R3,
R2-NOTICE IS D/W, V/O DTD: 30.08.2023)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 25.05.2012 PASSED IN MVC
NO.1464/10 ON THE FILE OF THE 1ST ADDITIONAL SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE & MACT-6, SHIVAMOGGA, PARTLY ALLOWING
THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed against the judgment and award dated
25.05.2012 passed by the Court of I Additional Senor Civil
Judge and MACT-VI, Shivamogga in MVC No.1464/2010.
2. The injured claimant filed claim application claiming
compensation of Rs.8,80,000/- with interest at the rate of 18%
per annum. The Tribunal, on considering the evidence on
record, granted compensation of Rs.81,179/- with interest at
the rate of 6% per annum. Aggrieved by the said order, the
claimant has preferred this appeal.
NC: 2025:KHC:30707
HC-KAR
3. Learned counsel for the appellant has contended that
though the appellant examined P.W.2, the said evidence was
not at all considered by the Tribunal. The appellant filed
certified copy of deposition of P.W.2, which is a translated copy.
The learned counsel for the appellant has further contended
that the appellant was a police constable met with an accident
in the year 2010. The appellant sustained disability and the
disability certificate was issued in his favour. Learned counsel
for the respondent has contended stated that the appellant was
promoted as Head Constable. Therefore, contended that the
parties shall be permitted to adduce evidence.
4. Heard the arguments of both sides.
5. There is no dispute regarding the fact that P.Ws.1 and
2 were examined and cross examined before the Tribunal, but
the judgment was given without considering the said evidence.
Even in the list of witnesses, the name of P.W.2 was not
mentioned. It seems that the said deposition was not enclosed
to the file and as such, it was not considered by the Tribunal.
Therefore, this Court finds that it is just and reasonable to
remand the matter to the Tribunal to consider the evidence of
NC: 2025:KHC:30707
HC-KAR
P.W.2, and also to permit both the parties to adduce any
further evidence on their behalf.
6. Accordingly, I pass the following order:
(i) The appeal is allowed and the matter is remanded
with a direction to the Tribunal to consider the evidence of
P.W.2.
(ii) The Tribunal shall permit all the parties to adduce
any further evidence.
(iii) The Tribunal is directed to consider the entire
evidence and the arguments of both side and dispose of the
matter within three months from the date of receipt of copy of
this order.
(iv) Registry is directed to send the record within ten
days from the date of this order.
(v) Parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal
on 01.09.2025.
Sd/-
(P SREE SUDHA)
JUDGE
CS
