MOHAMMED ASAD vs ABDUL GAFFAR AND ANR

Court
Karnataka High Court

- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10977
MFA No. 201995 of 2024


CNR: KAHC030005222024



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA



KALABURAGI BENCH

TH
DATED THIS THE 7 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BRUNGESH M

MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.201995 OF 2024 (MV-I)

BETWEEN:

MOHAMMED ASAD
S/O MOHAMMED MUSTAFA NATUBHAI,
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
R/O H. NO.1-108,
BHASKAR NAGAR, TOWN CHITGUPPA,
DIST. BIDAR584101.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SANJEEVKUMAR C. PATIL, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. ABDUL GAFFAR
S/O OSMAN ALI KHANARI,
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O 39-34 GAZIPURA BASAVAKALYAN,
NOW AT NOOR KHAN AKHADA HUMNABAD,
DIST. BIDAR -584101.

2. HDFC ERGO,
GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,
THROUGH ITS MANAGER,
KALABURAGI-585101.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. MANJUNATH MALLAYYA SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
V/O DATED 12.02.2025 NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH)











Digitally signed
by
BASALINGAPPA
S D
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA

- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10977
MFA No. 201995 of 2024


CNR: KAHC030005222024


THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT,
PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED
05.08.2023, PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND
MEMBER ADDL. MACT HUMNABAD, IN M.V.C NO.12/2021 BY
ENHANCING THE COMPENSATION, IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BRUNGESH M

ORAL JUDGMENT

This appeal is preferred by the appellant,
Sri Mohammed Asad son of Mohammed Mustafa Natubhai,
calling in question the legality and correctness of the
th
judgment and award dated 5 August, 2023 in MVC No.12
of 2021 passed by the Senior Civil Judge and Additional
M.A.C.T., Humnabad (hereinafter referred to as “the
Tribunal”)


2. The present appellant, namely, Mohammed
Asad, was the petitioner, whereas respondent Nos.1 and 2
herein were respondent Nos.1 and 2, respectively, before
the Tribunal.

- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10977
MFA No. 201995 of 2024


CNR: KAHC030005222024



3. For the sake of convenience and clarity, and to
avoid confusion, the parties shall be referred to as per
their ranks assigned to them before the Tribunal.


4. The facts giving rise to the appeal, in brief, are
as follows:
th
According to the petitioner, on 13 March, 2019, he
sustained grievous injuries in a road traffic accident that
occurred near Reddy Dhaba on Humnabad-Chitguppa
Road. According to the petitioner, the accident occurred
due to the exclusive negligence of the driver of the lorry
bearing registration No.KA-56-0213. It is further
contended that, on account of the said accident, the
petitioner sustained grievous injuries resulting in
permanent physical impairment. On these and other
grounds, the petitioner filed MVC No.12 of 2021 seeking
suitable compensation.

5. After presentation of the petition, the same
came to be registered and notices were issued to the

- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10977
MFA No. 201995 of 2024


CNR: KAHC030005222024


respondents. The respondents entered appearance before
the Tribunal. Respondent No.1, namely Abdul Ghaffar, did
not file his written statement. However, respondent No.2,
HDFC ERGO General Insurance Company, entered
appearance, filed its written statement and resisted the
claim petition.

6. After completion of the pleadings, the Tribunal
framed three issues for its consideration. Thereafter, the
Tribunal afforded reasonable opportunity to the parties to
adduce evidence. In support of his case, the petitioner,
Mohammed Asad, examined himself as PW1 and got
marked 24 documents as Exs.P1 to P24. Per contra,
respondent No.2 examined one of its officials, namely,
Yankangouda S. Patil, as RW1 and got marked one
document, namely, the insurance policy, as Ex.R1.

7. Thereafter, the learned Tribunal heard the
arguments of the learned advocates appearing for the
parties and proceeded to pass the impugned judgment and

- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10977
MFA No. 201995 of 2024


CNR: KAHC030005222024


th
award dated 5 August, 2023. The Tribunal awarded
compensation of Rs.18,45,224/-, together with interest at
the rate of 6% per annum from the date of the petition till
realization.

8. Aggrieved by the said judgment and award
passed by the learned Tribunal, the petitioner, Mohammed
Asad, has preferred the present appeal, principally
questioning the adequacy of the compensation awarded by
the Tribunal.

9. The record further discloses that, during the
pendency of the appeal, the petitioner has filed I.A. No.1
of 2026 under Order XLI Rule 27 read with Section 151 of
the Code of Civil Procedure, seeking permission of this
Court to produce additional documents. The petitioner has
also produced three medical bills and four photographs as
additional evidence and is seeking permission to produce
the said documents before the Tribunal and to lead further
evidence.

- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10977
MFA No. 201995 of 2024


CNR: KAHC030005222024


10. The record shows that the petitioner/appellant,
Mohammed Asad, has filed this appeal seeking
enhancement of compensation. The record further shows
that the appellant has filed I.A. No.1 of 2026 seeking
permission to produce additional evidence, namely,
additional medical documents and other allied documents.

11. This Court has perused the entire material
available on record. I.A. No.1 of 2026 shows that the
petitioner-Mohammed Asad specifically contends that after
institution of MVC No.12/2021 before the Tribunal and
even after disposal of the said MVC, he has been
continuously taking follow-up treatment and, in the
process, has incurred substantial expenditure. Further, the
learned counsel for the petitioner contends that, in order
to establish that he has incurred further expenditure
towards his continuous treatment, the petitioner is seeking
permission to produce the additional documents.

- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10977
MFA No. 201995 of 2024


CNR: KAHC030005222024


12. On the other hand, the learned advocate for
respondent No.2, Sri ManjunathaMallayya Shetty, is
present and contends that the documents sought to be
produced through I.A. No.1 of 2026 have no bearing on
the case in hand and have no nexus with the questions
involved in the appeal.

13. In addition, the learned advocate for respondent
No.2 contends that the medical bills and other allied
documents have been created and concocted by the
petitioner-Mohammed Asad, only with a view to claim
further compensation.

14. In the considered opinion of this Court, it is not
possible at this stage to express any opinion on the
contention that the said documents are concocted or
fabricated. This Court is also of the opinion that the
veracity and acceptability of those materials can be tested
only at the stage of cross-examination and when the
documents are sought to be marked in evidence.

- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10977
MFA No. 201995 of 2024


CNR: KAHC030005222024


Therefore, this Court refrains from expressing any opinion
on the rival contentions in that regard.

15. However, it is germane to mention that the
Motor Vehicles Act is a beneficial legislation, the object of
which is to provide just compensation to an injured person
to the extent possible, having regard to the position in
which he would have been met in the accident. Therefore,
the Court should not take a pedantic view that, once an
MVC is decided by the Tribunal, under no circumstances
can permission be granted to an injured person to produce
further documents which are germane to the matter for
determining just compensation.

16. Besides, it is well settled that an appeal is a
continuation of the original proceedings. In that view of
the matter, this Court is of the considered opinion that an
opportunity ought to be given to the petitioner-Mohammed
Asad to produce the said documents before the Tribunal
and establish that he has incurred substantial expenditure

- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10977
MFA No. 201995 of 2024


CNR: KAHC030005222024


towards his treatment and continues to incur considerable
expenditure towards his follow-up treatment.
17. After having held so, the Court should also be
conscious of the other consequences. In the considered
opinion of this Court, if some liberty is not reserved in
favour of the Insurance Company, it may certainly lead to
a chaotic situation, which needs to be avoided. It is
necessary to note that the learned advocate
for respondent No.2-Insurance Company,
Sri Manjunath Mallayya Shetty, contends that the
petitioner sustained injuries in the accident that occurred
in the year 2019, whereas the documents which the
petitioner now seeks permission to produce are medical
bills of the year 2025. Further, the learned advocate for
respondent No.2 contends that, having regard to the
considerable gap in time between the date of the accident
and the date on which these medical bills came into
existence, the same itself is sufficient to draw an inference
that the said medical bills have no nexus with the

- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10977
MFA No. 201995 of 2024


CNR: KAHC030005222024


accidental injuries sustained by the petitioner-Mohammed
Asad. Therefore, it is made clear that the Insurance
Company, namely, the present respondent No.2, is at
liberty to offer its resistance before the Tribunal when the
petitioner makes an effort to get the additional documents
marked in evidence. The Insurance Company is also at
liberty to raise all possible and legally available
contentions when the said documents are sought to be
marked before the Tribunal. Besides, it is made clear that
the Insurance Company is at liberty to put forth all legally
available contentions before the Tribunal while arguing the
matter on merits.

18. With these specific observations, this Court
proceeds to pass the following:

ORDER
i) The appeal is allowed .

- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10977
MFA No. 201995 of 2024


CNR: KAHC030005222024


ii) The judgment and award passed in MVC
No.12/2021 is set aside. The matter is
remitted to the learned Tribunal for fresh
disposal in accordance with law, after
providing an opportunity to the petitioner
as well as the Insurance Company to
adduce their respective further evidence,
both oral and documentary.


iii) It is made clear that this Court has not
expressed any opinion on the merits of the
case. All contentions are kept open to be
urged before the learned Tribunal.


iv) The parties shall appear before the Tribunal
on 05.11.2026, without awaiting any fresh
notice from the Tribunal.


v) The learned Tribunal is requested to
complete the evidence and dispose of the

- 12 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10977
MFA No. 201995 of 2024


CNR: KAHC030005222024


matter in accordance with law, as
expeditiously as possible.


vi) Office is directed send back the trial Court
records along with I.A.No.1/2026 and the
additional documents produced by the
petitioner – Mohammed Asad to the
Tribunal forthwith.



Sd/-
(BRUNGESH M)
JUDGE
BL
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 37
CT:SI