Allowed

The Claim Manager v. Sri. Shivakumar. B @

Karnataka HC19 Jul 2021MFA/2681/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Court allowed appeals in part and remanded the matter to the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. The grant of additional time for admission of new medical evidence without cross-examination was found insufficient, necessitating a remand to ascertain genuineness.

What did the court decide?

Both appeals allowed in part; Impugned award set aside; Matter remanded to Tribunal for reconsideration with additional evidence.

The Claim Manager Vs Sri. Shivakumar. B @ — Consumer Protection | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF JULY, 2021

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA

¶5

AND

¶6

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH

¶7

M.F.A.No.2681/2017 C/w. M.F.A No.2369/2017 (MV)

¶8

IN MFA No.2681/2017:

¶9

BETWEEN :

¶10

THE CLAIM MANAGER CHOLAMANDALAM M.S.GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED UNIT No.4, 9^TH FLOOR (LEVEL -6) GOLDEN HEIGHTS COMPLEX 59^TH ‘C’ CROSS, RAJAJINAGAR BENGALURU – 560 010 BY IT SENIOR MANAGER – CLAIMS ...APPELLANT

¶11

(BY SRI O.MAHESH, ADV.)

¶12

AND :

¶13

SRI SHIVAKUMAR B @ SHIVAKUMAR NAIDU B S/O.CHANDRASHEKAR AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS RESIDING AT No.30/9 BELLANDUR MAIN ROAD BENGALURU – 560 103 PERMANENT ADDRESS No.1-13, BUCHINAIDUPALLI BUCHINAIDUPALLI, CHANDRAGIRI BOPPARAJUPALLE, CHITTOR ANDHRAPRADESH – 5171 02

¶14

¶15

MANJUNATH V

¶16

S/O.VENKATASWAMY MAJOR No.860/1, MORACHANDIRAM, PERANDAPALLI POST, HOSUR TALUK, KRISHNAGIRI DISTRICT, TAMILNADU – 635 109 …RESPONDENTS

¶17

(BY SRI GURUDEV PRASAD K.T., ADV. FRO R-1 NOTICE TO R-2 DISPENSED WITH)

¶18

THIS M.F.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF M.V.ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 06.12.2016 PASSED IN MVC No.1881/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE IX ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE, & XXXIV ACMM, MEMBER, MACT-7, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU, (SCCH-7) AWARDING COMPENSATION OF Rs.50,70,497/- WITH INTEREST @ 9% P.A. (EXCLUDING FUTURE MEDICAL EXPENSES OF Rs.8,50,000/-) FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL PAYMENT AND ETC.,

¶19

IN M.F.A No.2369/2017:

¶20

BETWEEN :

¶21

SRI SHIVAKUMAR B @ SHIVAKUMAR NAIDU B S/O.CHANDRASHEKAR AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS RESIDING AT No. 30/9 BELLANDUR MAIN ROAD BENGALURU – 560 103

¶22

PERMANENT ADDRESS No.1-13, BUCHINAIDUPALLI BUCHINAIDUPALLI, CHANDRAGIRI BOPPARAJUPALLE, CHITTOR ANDHRAPRADESH – 5171 02 … APPELLANT

¶23

(BY SRI GURUDEV PRASAD K.T., ADV.)

¶24

AND :

¶25

MANJUNATH V S/O.VENKATASWAMY

¶26

MAJOR

¶27

- 3 -

¶28

No.860/1, MARACHANDIRAM PERANDAPALLI POST HOSUR TALUK KRISHNAGIRI DSITRICT TAMILNADU – 635 109

¶29

CHOLAMANDALAM M S GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED UNIT No.4, 9^TH FLOOR (LEVEL -6) GOLDEN HEIGHTS COMPLEX 59^TH C CROSS, RAJAJINAGAR BENGALURU – 560 010

¶30

BY ITS MANAGER … RESPONDENTS

¶31

(BY SRI O.MAHESH , ADV.FOR R-2 NOTICE TO R-1 DISPENSED WITH)

¶32

¶33

THESE APPEALS ARE COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, S. SUJATHA, J ., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶34

J U D G M E N T

¶35

The insurer as well as the claimants have filed these appeals challenging the judgment and award dated 06.12.2016 passed in MVC No.1881/2015 on the file of the IX Additional Small Causes and Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru (SCCH-7) [‘Tribunal’ for short].

¶36

¶37

The facts in brief are that the claimant

¶38

preferred claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 claiming compensation for the injuries sustained by him in the road traffic accident.

¶39

It was averred in the claim petition that on 11.04.2015 at about 11.35 p.m., when the claimant was riding the motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-01-ET7092, near petrol bunk, Dommasandra Village, Sarjapura, Bengaluru main road, Bengaluru Rural, the driver of the lorry bearing registration No.TN-31-AS1091 [offending vehicle] came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed from behind against the motorcycle. Due to the said impact, he fell down and sustained grievous injuries and the motorcycle was also damaged. Immediately, the injured was shifted to Primus Hospital, Bengaluru wherein he was treated with first-aid and later on, he was shifted to Fortis hospital, Bengaluru for further treatment wherein he

¶40

¶41

was subjected to 10 surgeries and his right leg above knee has been amputated and pelvic binder application has been done and internal implants were fixed with other surgeries. He has taken treatment from 12.04.2015 to 08.05.2015 with an advise to be under continuous follow up treatment. He has been advised to undergo other surgery in future and to be under complete bed rest. He has contended that he has incurred huge medical expenses and other incidental expenses.

¶42

It was contended that he was aged about 29 years at the time of the accident and he was registered electrical contractor, working at Sivathulasi Electricals and earning salary of Rs.20,000/- p.m. Due to accidental injuries, he is still under treatment, bound to take bed-rest and could not resume his avocation till the date of filing of the petition. Alleging actionable negligence on the driver of the offending vehicle, the

¶43

¶44

claimant sought for compensation with damages to the motorcycle.

¶45

In response to the notice issued, respondent No.1 though duly served, remained absent and hence, he was placed exparte.

¶46

Respondent No.2 – insurer has appeared before the Tribunal through its learned counsel and contested the claim. Written statement was filed denying the entire case of the claimant. Admitting the issuance of the policy contended that the liability if any, shall be strictly subject to the terms and conditions of the policy. The defence set up was that self negligence of the injured was the cause for the accident.

¶47

On the basis of the pleadings, issues were

¶48

framed and answered as per the reasons recorded in the impugned judgment allowing the petition in part, awarding total compensation of Rs.50,70,497/- with

¶49

- 7 -

¶50

interest at the rate of 9% p.a., [excluding future medical expenses of Rs.8,50,000/-] from the date of the petition till its realization, fastening the liability on the insurer to satisfy the award.

¶51

Being aggrieved by the liability fastened, the

¶52

insurer has filed MFA.No.2681/2017 whereas the claimant has filed MFA.No.2369/2017 being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded.

¶53

In the present proceedings, the

¶54

claimant/appellant in MFA.No.2369/2017 has filed I.A.No.1/2021 along with medical bills contending that subsequent to passing of the award, he has incurred

¶55

huge medical expenses. It is submitted that he was admitted as an inpatient at Fortis Hospital on two occasions subsequent to passing of the impugned judgment and award and has purchased prosthesis by incurring Rs.8,00,000/- apart from incurring medical expenses of Rs.10,27,340/-. Inpatient bills and Medical

¶56

¶57

bills are produced by way of additional evidence to be considered by this Court.

¶58

In this regard, learned counsel for the

¶59

insurer would fairly submit that the genuineness of the medical bills would be examined, if the matter is remanded to the Tribunal, keeping open the rights and contentions of the parties.

¶60

There is considerable force in the

¶61

submissions of the learned counsel for the insurer. The documents now sought to be produced on record as additional evidence requires to be taken on record after providing an opportunity to the insurer to crossexamine on this aspect and after ascertaining the genuineness of the documents. Hence, without going into the merits or demerits of the case, it would be suffice to remand the matters along with I.A.No.1/2021 to the Tribunal for re-consideration, in order to do complete justice to the parties.

¶62

¶63

12. Hence, we pass the following:

¶64

ORDER

¶65

i) Both the appeals are allowed in part.

¶66

ii) The impugned judgment and award dated 06.12.2016 passed in MVC No.1881/2015 on the file of the IX Additional Small Causes Judge and XXXIV ACMM, Member, MACT-7, Court of Small Causes, Bangalore (SCCH-7) is set aside.

¶67

iii) The matter is remanded to the Tribunal for reconsideration along with I.A.No.1/2021 filed by the claimant for additional evidence in MFA No.2369/2017 keeping open all the rights and contentions of the parties.

¶68

iv) The parties are at liberty to adduce evidence/additional evidence, if any before the Tribunal.

¶69

10 -

¶70

v) The Tribunal shall re-consider the matter and pass appropriate orders on merits in accordance with law in an expeditious manner.

¶71

vi) Since the parties are represented by their respective learned counsel, the parties/learned counsel for the parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 30.08.2021 without waiting for any notice and shall take further orders.

¶72

vii) The Registry shall transfer the amount in deposit to the jurisdictional Tribunal forthwith.

¶73

Sd/JUDGE

¶74

Sd/JUDGE

¶75

NC.

The Claim Manager v. Sri. Shivakumar. B @

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Claim Manager v. Sri. Shivakumar. B @

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Regional Manger Vs Kaliappan

Sri Kaliappan Vs Smt Parvathi B

Sri. Rangaswamy M R Vs Sri. Ningaraju

Sri S.N.Narasimha Murthy @ Murthy Vs Shriram General Insurance Company Ltd.

Sri. Shiva Kumar B @ Vs Manjunath v

Sri.H.C. Kumaraswamy Vs Special Land