- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19090 M.F.A. No.1173/2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.1173/2020 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SRI. RAMU S/O THIPPENAYAKA AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS R/AT NO.49, III B CROSS JAKKUR MAIN ROAD, AMRUTHALLI SAHAKARA NAGAR, BANGALORE-560092. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. R. LAKSHMANA, ADV.,) AND: 1. GOUTHAM .R S/O RAMAKRISHNAIAH AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS R/AT NEAR MARAMMA TEMPLE AMRUTHHALLI, SAHAKARA NAGAR BANGALORE-560092. 2. BRANCH MANAGER ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD 9TH FLOOR, THE ESTATE, NO.121 DICKENSON ROAD, F.M.CARIAPPA COLONY SHIVACHETTY GARDEN BANGALORE-560042. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.C. SHIVANNEGOWDA, ADV., FOR R2 V/O/DTD:20.07.2022, NOTICE TO R1 IS D/W) Digitally signed by ARSHIFA BAHAR KHANAM Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19090 M.F.A. No.1173/2020 THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 07.01.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.3372/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE XIII ADDITIONAL JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, AND MEMBER MACT, BENGALURU (SCCH-15), 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 MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the injured appellant challenging the judgment and award dated 07.01.2019 in MVC.No.3372/2017 by the XIII Additional Judge, Court of Small Causes and Member, MACT, Bengaluru (SCCH-15) (for short ‘the Tribunal’). 2. Though this appeal is listed for admission, with the consent of the learned counsels for the parties, it is taken up for final disposal. 3. Heard Sri.R.Lakshmana, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Sri.B.C.Shivannegowda, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19090 M.F.A. No.1173/2020 learned counsel for respondent No.2 and meticulously perused the material available on record. 4. The appellant sustained grievous injury in a road accident dated 18.12.2016. He was provided treatment at M.S.Ramaiah Hospital, Bengaluru. The injured appellant filed a claim petition. In support of his claim, he examined himself as PW1 and got marked Ex.P1 to Ex.P16. The respondent, however did not adduce any evidence. The Tribunal considering the oral and documentary evidence on record, awarded a total compensation of Rs.2,16,000/- along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization of the amount. 5. This appeal is by the injured appellant seeking for higher compensation. In this appeal, the appellant has also filed an application in IA.No.1/2026 under Order XLI Rule 27 read with Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short ‘CPC’) seeking permission to produce - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19090 M.F.A. No.1173/2020 additional documents. A perusal of the affidavit of the appellant in support of the application indicates that, after discharge from the hospital and during the pendency of the claim petition, as well as thereafter, the appellant continued with the treatment for his head injuries and now seeks for consideration of the additional documents. The learned counsel for the Insurance Company has seriously opposed both the application and the appeal and submits that the accident occurred in the year 2016, the claim petition was disposed of in the year 2019 and the documents now sought to be produced are of the year 2025 which claims that there is a continuation of treatment which is not credible at this stage. 6. On perusal of the additional documents produced by the appellant, it is seen that the appellant has undergone treatment for head injuries and Dr. Kishore Rao has recorded observation that the injuries are pertaining to the road traffic accident. However, such observations cannot be accepted as a gospel truth unless the same is - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19090 M.F.A. No.1173/2020 produced before the Tribunal and after providing an opportunity to the respondent to contest the same. Only thereafter can such material be evaluated and treated as evidence for the purpose of determining of compensation. In my considered view, having regard to the documents produced, the ends of justice would be met if the matter is remitted back to the Tribunal with liberty to the appellant to produce the additional documents before the Tribunal. For the aforementioned reasons, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER. i) The appeal is allowed in part. ii) The impugned judgment and award dated 07.01.2019 in MVC.No.3372/2017 by the XIII Additional Judge, Court of Small Causes and Member, MACT, Bengaluru (SCCH-15) is hereby set aside. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19090 M.F.A. No.1173/2020 iii) The matter is remitted back to the Tribunal with liberty to the appellant/claimant to produce documentary evidence and also to adduce oral evidence. iv) It is needless to observe that the respondent/Insurance Company is at liberty to adduce evidence and cross examine the witness and evidence produced by the claimant. v) The registry shall return the original documents along with the IA on obtaining the Xerox copies of the same. vi) The Tribunal is directed to consider the early disposal of the claim petition. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE ABK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9