Salman Khan Vs Syed Yakub

THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 18-11-2017 PASSED IN MVC NO.25 OF 2013 ON THE FILE OF THE MACT, II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, KOLAR, DISMISSING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION.

¶25

THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶26

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T

¶27

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶28

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T)

¶29

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent.

¶30

The appeal is filed by the claimant for enhancement of compensation challenging the judgment and award passed in MVC.No.25/2013 dated 18.11.2017 by the MACT and II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Kolar (for short, "the Tribunal").

¶31

For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred to as they were arrayed in the claim petition before the Tribunal.

¶32

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:38573-DB MFA No. 1624 of 2023

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

The brief facts of the case are as under:

¶35

On 19.04.2011 at about 1.30 p.m., one Salman Khan was

¶36

checking sand in a Lorry near Goravigere gate, Katamnallur -

¶37

Kadugodi Road, Bidarahalli Hobli, Bangalore Rural District. At that time, one Ambassador Car bearing No.MEJ 5074 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against him. Due to impact, he sustained fracture of the left tibia and other grievous injuries. Hence, he filed claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation.

¶38

The Tribunal, on consideration of the oral evidence of PW1 and documentary evidence marked as Ex.D1, dismissed the claim petition filed by the claimant. Aggrieved by the same, the claimant has preferred this appeal.

¶39

The claimant has also filed I.A.No.2/2023 under Order XLI Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure by producing certified copies of the following documents:

¶40

Certified copy of the Order sheet in CC No.3739/2013 on the file of Additional Chief, Judicial Magistrate (District), Bengaluru.

¶41

Certified copy of the FIR in Crime No.11/2012 dated 07.01.2012.

¶42

4 -

¶43

NC: 2025:KHC:38573-DB MFA No. 1624 of 2023

¶44

HC-KAR

¶45

Certified copy of the Complaint dated 07.01.2012.

¶46

Certified copy of the charge sheet.

¶47

Certified copy of Spot Mahazar.

¶48

Certified copy of Seizure Mahazar.

¶49

Certified copy of Motor vehicle accident report.

¶50

Certified copy of Indemnity Bond dated 02.02.2012

¶51

Certified copy of two statements of injured dated 05.07.2012.

¶52

10.Certified copy of two statements of witness dated 05.07.2012.

¶53

The appellant contended that, due to oversight

¶54

the aforesaid documents were not placed before the Tribunal, despite the due diligence exercised. Thus, the claimant has prayed for remand of the matter.

¶55

Sri. Ravish Benni, learned counsel for respondent No.2, fairly submitted that he has no objection for remand of the matter in view of the additional documents produced by the claimant before this Court.

¶56

We have perused the impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal as well as the list of documents filed in I.A.No.2/2023. Admittedly, the claimant had not furnished any documents such as FIR, Complaint, Charge sheet, Mahazar, Spot sketch etc., before the Tribunal. The Tribunal proceeded to dispose of the matter only on the basis of medical bills and

¶57

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:38573-DB MFA No. 1624 of 2023

¶58

HC-KAR

¶59

dismissed the claim petition of the appellant. Under such circumstances, he seek for remand. In this case, we find and believe that re-trial is necessary for a proper decision. Hence, we are remanding the matter for fresh consideration. If the matter is remanded to the Tribunal for consideration of the additional documents now produced by the claimant, no prejudice would be caused to either party.

¶60

10. Accordingly, we pass the following:

¶61

ORDER

¶62

i) I.A.No.2/2023 filed under Order XLI Rule 27 of CPC is allowed and consequently, the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal in MVC.No.25/2013 dated 18.11.2017 is hereby set aside. The matter is remanded to the Tribunal for fresh consideration.

¶63

ii) Both the parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 27.10.2025. All contentions are kept open.

¶64

6 -

¶65

NC: 2025:KHC:38573-DB MFA No. 1624 of 2023

¶66

HC-KAR

¶67

iii) In the event of notice not being served, the claimant is at liberty to serve notice upon the unserved respondents before the Tribunal.

¶68

iv) Insofar as the delay is concerned, the claimant is not entitled to interest for the delayed period of 1129 days from the date of filing of the appeal till date.

¶69

v) The claimants shall also not be entitled to interest on the compensation, if any, awarded by the Tribunal, from Institution of Appeal till date (from 07.03.2023 to 23.09.2025)

¶70

(D K SINGH) JUDGE

¶71

Sd/(VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE

¶72

AM

¶73

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13

Salman Khan v. Syed Yakub

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Salman Khan v. Syed Yakub

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri Danush B Praveen Vs the State of Karnataka

Susheelamma Vs Bharath R

The Income Tax Officer Vs Dr Ramdas Madhava Pai

Shri Anand R Vs Shri Dinesha H P

Smt. Meenakshi Vs Sri. Girish. N

Sri. Ajay Jayakumar Nair Vs Medical Council of India