Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 15063

KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
R.DEVDAS, K V ARAVIND, JJ
THE REGIONAL MANAGER RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. – Appellant
Versus
KALLAPPA @ KALMESH S/O BASAPPA HAVADI – Respondent
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.101564 OF 2018 (MV-I) | MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.102457 OF 2018 (MV-I)

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI. G.N. RAICHUR, SRI. SANTOSH B. RAWOOT
For the Respondents: SRI. G.N. RAICHUR, SRI. SANTOSH B. RAWOOT

Court determined that parties must follow due process for evidence presentation, ensuring fairness in the claim adjudication process.

Headnote:(A) Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Section 173(1) - Appeals filed to modify the judgment and award from the Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal XIV Mudhol regarding compensation - The insurance company sought to introduce additional evidence after the accident occurred - Court found additional document inadmissible unless introduced properly and remanded case back to Tribunal for expeditious hearing. (Paras 1-5)

(B) Appeal - Requirement of fair procedure in evidentiary hearings - Court observed that the new document must be tendered to the owner of the vehicle for proper consideration in the claim for compensation. (Paras 1-5)

Facts of the case:
The appeals arose from a request to modify the previous judgment regarding compensation for a vehicle accident. The insurance company contended that a newly obtained permit altering liability was required to be considered but needed to be introduced appropriately in the evidence.

Findings of Court:
The court remanded the matter to the Tribunal, directing it to allow the introduction of new documents while ensuring that the parties were given fair notice to appear and resolve the case efficiently within a set timeframe.

Issues: Whether the insurance company could introduce new evidence after the accident and how to ensure the case is expedited.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that additional documents must follow proper evidence protocols and must be communicated effectively to all parties in the interest of fair trial; hence remanding the case to be re-opened for consideration.

Result: The appeals were disposed of with directions for expedited hearings.

Table of Content
1. introduction of additional evidence requires proper protocols. (Para 1)
2. court noted the need for fairness in evidentiary hearings. (Para 2 , 3)
3. case remanded for expedited proceedings. (Para 4 , 5)

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.DEVDAS)

Although we heard the learned counsels for the appellant-Insurance Company and the appellant-claimant in the two appeals, nevertheless, we find that the insurance company has filed an application in I.A.No.1/2022 seeking to bring on record the additional documents, namely a permit issued by the Deputy Commissioner for Transport, Belagavi. It is sought to be contended at the hands of the learned counsel for the insurance company that permit was taken by the owner of the vehicle after the accident and the permit is valid from 04.03.2016 to 03.03.2021, while the accident occurred on

07.12.2015.

2. However, we are of the considered opinion that unless the document is put to the owner of the vehicle, it cannot be admitted in evidence, at this stage.

3. Consequently, we dispose of both the appeals while remanding the matter back to the Tribunal to HC-KAR re-open the case and permit the insurance company to tender the additional document. We also direct the Tribunal to once again issue notice to the owner of the vehicle, having regard to the stand that is now taken by the insurance company.

4. The matter shall be heard and disposed of, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

5. In order to ensure early disposal of the case, we direct the insurance company and the claimant to appear before the Tribunal on 14.07.2025 without waiting further notice.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 15063

KARNATAKA HIGH COURTR.DEVDAS, K V ARAVIND, JJTHE REGIONAL MANAGER RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. – AppellantVersusKALLAPPA @ KALMESH S/O BASAPPA HAVADI – RespondentMISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.101564 OF 2018 (MV-I) | MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.102457 OF 2018 (MV-I)

Court determined that parties must follow due process for evidence presentation, ensuring fairness in the claim adjudication process.

KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
R.DEVDAS, K V ARAVIND, JJ
THE REGIONAL MANAGER RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. – Appellant
Versus
KALLAPPA @ KALMESH S/O BASAPPA HAVADI – Respondent
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.101564 OF 2018 (MV-I) | MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.102457 OF 2018 (MV-I)