Sri Vishwanatha Acharya Vs the Managing Director M/S Vrl Logistics Ltd.

SRI. VISHWANATHA ACHARYA S/O BABU ACHARYA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS R/AT DOOR NO.2-194/3 NEAR SHREE ANANTHA PADMANABHA TEMPLE KUDUPU POST & VILLAGE - 572 028 MANGALORE D.K.

¶10

…APPELLANT

¶11

(BY SRI. LOKESHA K, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. ABHISHEK MARLA M.J, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by PADMASHREE SHEKHAR DESAI

¶14

Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶15

THE MANAGING DIRECTOR M/S. VRL LOGISTICS LTD., REGD. AND ADMN OFFICE NH-4, BANGALORE ROAD VARUR, HUBLI - 580 020.

¶16

ICICI LOMBARD REP. BY TE MANAGER GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., MAXIMUS COMMERCIAL COMPLEX, LIGHT HOUSE HILL ROAD MANGALORE - 575 001.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI. ARAVIND M. NEGLUR, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. A.N. KRISHNASWAMY, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶19

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:28183 MFA No. 7429 of 2014

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 25.04.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.871/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDE, MEMBER, MACT, D.K., MANGALORE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶22

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶23

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA

¶24

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶25

Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties.

¶26

This appeal is filed by the appellant/claimant

¶27

under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, challenging the judgment and award dated 25.04.2014 passed in MVC No.871/2012 by the Court of the III Additional District and Sessions Judge and MACT-IV, D.K. Mangalore (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal' for short) seeking enhancement of compensation.

¶28

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:28183 MFA No. 7429 of 2014

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

The injured claimant met with a road traffic accident on 14.10.2011 and filed a claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.20,00,000/-. The Tribunal, after considering the entire evidence on record awarded a compensation of Rs.6,30,000/-. Aggrieved by the said judgment and award the appellant/claimant has preferred this appeal.

¶31

During the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the doctor who assessed the disability was not examined before the Tribunal and that only the disability certificate issued by the Government Hospital was produced. It is further submitted that the claimant had suffered amputation of the left upper limb and his disability was assessed as 85%. In the circumstances, this Court finds it just and reasonable to remand the matter to the Tribunal with a specific direction to afford reasonable opportunity to both parties to adduce evidence and to advance arguments.

¶32

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:28183 MFA No. 7429 of 2014

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

The Tribunal shall thereafter reconsider the matter on merits in accordance with law, after duly appreciating the entire evidence on record and dispose of the claim petition expeditiously, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, as the matter

¶35

pertains to the year 2014.

¶36

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. The matter is remanded to the Tribunal with a specific direction to afford reasonable opportunity to both parties to adduce evidence and to advance arguments and to dispose of the claim petition expeditiously, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶37

The learned counsel appearing for both parties shall cooperate with the Tribunal for the expeditious disposal of the matter within the stipulated period.

¶38