THE MANAGER vs BHAGANNA
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11353
WP No. 200445 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030013972026
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. 200445 OF 2026 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
THE MANAGER,
TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD,
TH
15 FLOOR, TOWER A, PENINSULA BUSINESS,
PARK GANPATRAO KADAM MARG,
OPP. SENAPATI BAPAT MARG,
LOWER PAREL-400013
REP. BY AUTHORISED SIGNATORY.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. MALLAPUR SUBHASH S, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. BHAGANNA S/O AMBANNA,
AGE: 20 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE,
R/O 1-30, AURAD(B), VILLAGE,
MAHAGAON, TQ. KAMALAPUR,
DIST. KALABURAGI-585316.
2. REVANASIDDAPPA
S/O BHIMARAO YARBAG,
AGE: 38 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O AURAD (B) VILLAGE,
TQ. AND DIST. KALABURAGI- 585316.
…RESPONDENTS
Digitally signed
by SHIVALEELA
D UDAGI
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11353
WP No. 200445 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030013972026
(BY SRI. SAJJANSHETTY SHASHIKANT, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
V/O DATED 01.10.2026, NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED
WITH)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO A) ISSUE A WRIT
IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI AND QUASH THE ORDER
DATED 23.12.2025 PASSED IN INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION
NO.3, BY THE I ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT
KALABURAGI IN MVC NO.13/2025 VIDE ANNEXURE-D AND
CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE SAME, DIRECTING THE TRIBUNAL
TO PERMIT THE PETITIONER TO FILE WRITTEN STATEMENT TO
CLAIM PETITION AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN “B” GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS
UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMANYA RANGARAO
ORAL ORDER
This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:
“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
23.12.2025 passed in Interlocutory Application No.3 by
the I Addl. Senior Civil Judge and MACT Kalaburagi in
MVC No.13/2025 vide Annexure-D 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
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11353
WP No. 200445 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030013972026
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.”
2. Respondent No.1 herein had filed a Claim Petition in
MVC No.13/2025 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at
Kalaburagi, seeking compensation of Rs.17,85,000/- under
different heads, including interest on account of the suffering of
injury in a motor accident. The Petitioner, being the respondent
No. 1, filed an application under Section 151 of the Code of
Civil Procedure, seeking the permission of the Tribunal to file a
written statement along with a memorandum of facts signed by
the Advocate. The Tribunal rejected the application filed by the
petitioner/respondent by order dated 23.12.2025, with costs,
observing that the written statement of respondent No.2 is not
accepted as it was filed after expiry of the statutory period. It is
this order which is impugned in the present writ petition.
3. 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
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11353
WP No. 200445 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030013972026
written statement has to be filed so as to effectively defend the
interest of the Insurance Company. Since the Company had to
conduct the internal investigation and collect the material
documents, this process consumed time and, as such, the delay
in filing the written statement ought to have been condoned by
the Tribunal. 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, allowed the
petition and directed the Tribunal to take the written statement
on record and thereafter proceed further 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 should be disposed of in the same terms.
4. Per contra , learned counsel for Respondent
No.1/Claimant No.1, though supports the order passed by the
Tribunal, has fairly submitted that he does not dispute the view
taken by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Writ Petition
No. 203746 of 2025 dated 25.11.2025. Learned counsel for the
Claimant submits that, instead of standing on technicalities, the
Petitioner/Insurance Company may be permitted to file a
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11353
WP No. 200445 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030013972026
written statement, and the petition before the Tribunal seeking
compensation filed by the Claimant be directed to be disposed
of at the earliest.
5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents and
perused the materials placed on record.
6. The Tribunal has mainly rejected the application on
two grounds. Firstly , the written statement sought to be filed
is after the period prescribed under Order VIII Rule 1 of the
Code of Civil Procedure. Secondly , in light of the amendment
brought to the Code of Civil Procedure, i.e., Karnataka Act
No.40/2025, the written statement ought to have been filed
within 120 days from the date of service of summons.
7. Undoubtedly, the proceedings before the Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal are summary in nature. Even the
Karnataka Motor Vehicle Rules specify the applicability of
certain provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure. Admittedly,
insofar as the filing of the written statement beyond the
prescribed period before the Tribunal is concerned, the
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11353
WP No. 200445 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030013972026
Coordinate Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No.203746/2025
in identical circumstances has permitted the written statement
to be taken on record, filed by the Insurance Company by
placing reliance upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme
1
Court in the case of Kailash Vs. Nanhku and Others . The
aforementioned decision is aptly applicable to the case on
hand. In the light of the observations referred to above, the
petition deserves to be allowed in terms of the order passed in
Writ Petition No.203746/2025 dated 25.11.2025.
8. As far as the applicability of the amended provision
is concerned, it is appropriate to refer to the amended provision
of Karnataka Act No.40/2025 and the same is extracted
hereunder.
(i) In the Order V, in rule, 1, in sub-rule (1),
after the second proviso the following
proviso shall be inserted, namely ;-
“provided also that where the defendant fails
to file the written statement within the said
period of thirty days, he shall be allowed to
file the Written Statement on such other day,
as may be specified by the Court, for reasons
to be recorded in writing and on payment of
such costs as the Court deems fit, but which
1
(2005) 4 SCC 480
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11353
WP No. 200445 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030013972026
shall not be later than one hundred twenty
days from the date of service of summons
and on expiry of one hundred twenty days
from the date of service of summons, the
defendant shall forfeit the right to the
Written Statement and the Court shall not
allow the Written Statement to be taken on
record.”
9. The proviso categorically indicates that the said
provision has been brought into force from 05.06.2025. In
other words, suits filed prior to 05.06.2025 are governed by the
unamended provisions, not the amended provisions that came
into force on 05.06.2025. In the case on hand, the Claim
Petition was filed on 14.06.2024 and numbered as MVC
No.13/2025. The respondents do not dispute the
aforementioned fact.
10. Indeed, the Coordinate Bench of this Court in T.
2
Gayathri v. Prabhijit Dhariwal , by order dated
17.03.2026 , has held that the Karnataka Act No.40/2025, by
which amendment is brought to Order VIII Rule 1, observed
that the same is prospective and would not operate
retrospectively. It is relevant to extract paragraph Nos.9 and
2
2026 SCC OnLine Kar 2419
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11353
WP No. 200445 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030013972026
10 of the order passed in Writ Petition No.8090/2026 dated
17.03.2026, as under:
“9. The State Government has brought an
amendment—Karnataka Act No.40/2025—
which was notified on 05.06.2025. Order VIII
Rule 1 has been amended to provide that if the
defendants fail to file the written statement
within a period of 30 days, they shall be
allowed to file the written statement on such
date as may be specified by the Court, for
reasons to be recorded in writing, on payment
of such costs as the Court deems fit. However,
it shall not be later than 120 days from the
date of service of summons. On the expiry of
120 days, the defendants shall forfeit the right
to file the written statement. The
constitutional validity of the amendment has
also been challenged in some cases.
10. In the case on hand, with respect to suits
that were filed before the Amendment Act
came into force, and having regard to the
submissions of the learned Additional
Advocate General, it has to be construed that
Karnataka Act No. 40/2025, in respect of
Order VIII Rule 1 of the CPC, is applicable only
to suits filed after 05.06.2025.”
11. In light of the view taken by the Coordinate Bench
of this Court, referred to supra , the ruling of the Tribunal that
the amendment, which has come into force from 05.06.2025,
- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11353
WP No. 200445 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030013972026
would operate retrospectively, cannot be accepted, and is
contrary to the law declared as above.
12. Hence, this Court proceeds to pass the following:
ORDER
i. The Writ Petition is hereby allowed.
ii. The Tribunal is directed to take the Petitioner’s
written statement on record and proceed to
dispose of the claim petition as expeditiously as
possible.
iii. The contentions of the parties are kept open
to be canvassed before the Tribunal.
Sd/-
(SUBRAMANYA RANGARAO)
JUDGE
AMA
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25