THE LEGAL MANAGER HDFC ERGO vs ROHIT

- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11343
WP No. 203944 of 2025
CNR: KAHC030158602025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
TH
DATED THIS THE 14 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMANYA RANGARAO
WRIT PETITION NO. 203944 OF 2025 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
THE LEGAL MANAGER,
HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
OPP: KANNADA BHAVAN,
ABOVE ADISHWAR SHOP,
NEAR SVP CHOWK,
MAIN ROAD, KALABURAGI-585102
REP. BY AUTHORISED SIGNATORY.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. MALLAPUR SUBHASH S, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. ROHIT S/O APASAHEB SUPINE,
AGE: 23 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
LABOUR NOW NIL,
R/O LAXMI TAKALI, TQ. PANDHARPUR,
DIST. SOLAPUR, MAHARASHTRA
NOW RESIDING NEAR AMBA BHAVANI TEMPLE,
SHAHABAZAR, KALABURAGI,
DUMB AND DEAF BY BIRTH
REP. BY HIS NATURAL MOTHER/NEXT FRIEND
SMT. KOMAL W/O APASAHAEB SUPANE,
AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O LAXMI TAKALI, TQ. PANDHARPUR,
DIST. SOLAPUR, MAHARASHTRA,
NOW RESIDING NEAR AMBA BHAVANI TEMPLE,
SHAHABAZAR, KALABURAGI-585 101.
Digitally signed by
SHIVALEELA D UDAGI
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA

- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11343
WP No. 203944 of 2025
CNR: KAHC030158602025
2. MRS. JAYASHRI BAPU PUKALE,
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: NOT KNOWN,
R/O DHONEVASTI, SANGOLA ROAD,
TALKIL, TAKLI BYPASS, TQ. PANDHARPUR,
DIST. SOLAPUR-413304.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SANGANAGOUDA V. BIRADAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
V/O DATED 21.01.2026, NOTICE TO R2 IS D/W)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO A) ISSUE A WRIT
IN NATURE OF CERTIORARI AND QUASH THE ORDER DATED
11.11.2025 PASSED IN I.A.NO.III BY THE I ADDL. SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT KALABURAGI IN MVC NO.312/2025
VIDE ANNEXURE-C AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE SAME,
DIRECTING THE TRIBUNAL TO PERMIT THE PETITIONER TO
FILE WRITTEN STATEMENT TO CLAIM PETITION, B) ISSUE ANY
OTHER WRIT ORDER OR DIRECTION AS THIS HON’BLE COURT
DEEMS FIT UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, C)
PASS ANY SUCH ORDER OR DIRECTION DEEMS FIT UNDER THE
CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN “B” GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS
UNDER:
SUBRAMANYA RANGARAO
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE

- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11343
WP No. 203944 of 2025
CNR: KAHC030158602025
ORAL ORDER
This Writ Petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:
“(a) Issue a writ in nature of Certiorari and quash
the order dated 11.11.2025 passed in I.A.No.III
by the I Addl. Senior Civil Judge and MACT
Kalaburagi in MVC No.312/2025 vide Annexure-C
and consequently allow the same, directing the
Tribunal to permit the petitioner to file written
statement to claim petition.
(b) Issue any other writ order or direction as
this Hon’ble Court deems fit under the
circumstances of the case in the interest of
justice.
(c) Pass any such order or direction deems fit
under the circumstances of the case, in the
interest of justice.“
2. The Petitioner/Insurance Company is before this Court
assailing the order dated 04.11.2025 passed on IA. No. III in
MVC No.312/2025 by the I Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Kalaburagi
(for short, ‘the Tribunal’), in rejecting the application filed by
the Petitioner/Insurance Company for filing a written statement
with costs.
3. The facts germane are that the Respondent herein filed
the petition in MVC No.312/2025, seeking award of
compensation of Rs.45,00,000/- with costs and interest at the
rate of 18% per annum from the date of petition till the date of

- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11343
WP No. 203944 of 2025
CNR: KAHC030158602025
realisation from respondent Nos.1 and 2 therein jointly and
severally. The Tribunal ordered notice to respondents therein,
including the Petitioner/Insurance company. The Petitioner filed
an application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure
seeking permission to file a written statement, vide application
dated 29.10.2025. The Tribunal rejected the said application by
order dated 04.11.2025, which is impugned in the present
proceedings.
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner/Insurance Company
submits that the written statement could not be filed well within
the time stipulated in view of the fact that the internal
investigation is to be conducted and, upon the internal
investigation and collection of the material documents, the
written statement has to be filed so as to effectively defend the
interest of the Insurance Company. Since the internal
investigation on behalf of the Company would require some
time, the Tribunal ought to have condoned the delay in filing
the written statement. Nevertheless, learned counsel submits
that, in identical circumstances, the co-ordinate Bench of this
Court, in Writ Petition No.203746 of 2025 dated 25.11.2025,

- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11343
WP No. 203944 of 2025
CNR: KAHC030158602025
has allowed the application, directing the Tribunal to take the
written statement on record and thereafter proceed in
accordance with law. Learned counsel submits that, in light of
the aforementioned decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of this
Court, this Writ Petition may also be disposed of on the same
terms.
5. Per contra , learned counsel for the Respondent/Claimant,
who supports the Tribunal’s order, has fairly submitted that he
does not dispute the Co-ordinate Bench’s view in Writ Petition
No. 203746 of 2025 dated 25.11.2025. Learned counsel for the
Claimant submits that, instead of proceeding on technicalities,
the Petitioner/Insurance Company may be permitted to file a
written statement, and the Tribunal may be directed to dispose
of the Claimant's Petition filed before it at the earliest.
6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
documents on record.
7. Undisputedly, the proceedings before the Tribunal are
summary in nature. The enabling provisions under the
Karnataka Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989, provide the procedures
to be adopted by the Claims Tribunal. The Writ Petitioner, in

- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11343
WP No. 203944 of 2025
CNR: KAHC030158602025
the application filed seeking permission to file the written
statement, has also filed a Memorandum of Facts. In the
Memorandum of Facts, the Petitioner sought to justify the delay
in filing the written statement by stating that the internal
investigation takes place within the Company and that the
written statement would be filed thereafter.
8. Admittedly, the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, in Writ
Petition No.203746 of 2025 dated 25.11.2025, in identical
circumstances, allowed the Writ Petition and directed the
Tribunal to take on record the written statement and proceed
further in the matter. In its decision, this Court relied on the
Apex Court's decision in Kailash v. Nanhku and Others,
reported in (2005) 4 SCC 480 , holding that the time frame
under Order 8 Rule 1 of CPC is directory, not mandatory. In
light of the order passed in Writ Petition No. 203746 of 2025
dated 25.11.2025, this Writ Petition is also liable to be disposed
of on the same terms.
9. Hence, this Court proceeds to pass the following:
ORDER
(a) The Writ Petition is hereby allowed .

- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11343
WP No. 203944 of 2025
CNR: KAHC030158602025
(b) The Tribunal is directed to take the written
statement on record, proceed further in
accordance with law, and dispose of the Claim
Petition as expeditiously as possible.
Sd/-
(SUBRAMANYA RANGARAO)
JUDGE
MSR
LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 22
Ct:si