IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11th DAY OF DECEMBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. SREENIVASE GOWDA M.F.A.No.6925/2013 C/w M.F.A.No.6924/2013 (MV) In M.F.A.No.6925/2013 BETWEEN:
SMT. BHAGYAMMA W/O B.RAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS PERMANENT RESIDENT OF PEDDAPURAM VILLAGE LAKKANAPALLE POST BALREDDY PALLE MANDAL CHITTOOR DISTRICT.
PRESENTLY RESIDING AT:
NO.39, I CROSS, IST A MAIN VIVEKANANDA NAGAR BSK 3RD STAGE, BANGALORE 50085 … APPELLANT (BY SRI GURUDEV PRASAD.K.T, ADV.) AND:
1. P. NAGARAJU MAJOR S/O P.MUNASWAMY NO 9-66 DHANAMALAHGARIPALLI VILLAGE AND POST CHITTOOR DISTRICT – 571 001.
2. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, 6TH FLOOR, KRUSHI BHAVAN HUDSON CIRCLE BANGALORE – 560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K N HARISH BABU & ASSTS, ADV., FOR R1 SRI. A.N. KRISHNASWAMY, ADV., FOR R2) IN M.F.A.NO.6924/2013 BETWEEN:
SRI B.RAMAPPA S/O RANGAPPA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS PERMANENT RESIDENT OF PEDDAPURAM VILLAGE LAKKANAPALLE POST BALREDDY PALLE MANDAL CHITTOOR DISTRICT PRESENTLY RESIDING AT:
NO.39, 1ST CROSS, 1ST A MAIN VIVEKANANDA NAGAR BSK 3RD STAGE BANGALORE-560085 ... APPELLANT (BY SRI GURUDEV PRASAD.K.T, ADV.) AND:
1. P. NAGARAJU MAJOR S/O P. MUNASWAMY NO 9-66 DHANAMALAHGARIPALLI VILLAGE AND POST CHITTOOR DISTRICT – 571 001.
2. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, 6TH FLOOR, KRUSHI BHAVAN HUDSON CIRCLE BANGALORE – 560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K N HARISH BABU & ASSTS, ADV. FOR R1 SRI. A.N. KRISHNASWAMY, ADV. FOR R2) THESE APPEALS ARE FILED UNDER U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 04.05.2013 PASSED IN MVC NOS.7365/2011 AND 7366/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE XXI ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE, AND XIX ACMM, MEMBER, MACT, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BANGALORE, DISMISSING THE PETITION AS NOT MAINTAINABLE.
THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
J U D G M E N T These appeals are by the claimants challenging the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal whereby the Tribunal has dismissed their claim petitions holding that it has no territorial jurisdiction.
2. As both the claim petitions have arisen out of a common judgment of the Tribunal, with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, they are heard together and disposed of by this common judgment. Perused the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal.
3. The point that arises for consideration in both the appeals is;
(i) Whether the Tribunal was justified in dismissing the claim petition filed in MVC No.7365/2011 and 7366/2011 on the ground that claimants have failed to establish that they are residing within the territorial jurisdiction of the Tribunal?
4. Sri K.T.Gurudev Prasad, learned counsel appearing for the claimants in both the appeals submits that though claimants are native of Peddapuram Village in Chittoor District of Andra Pradesh State they have been residing at Viveknagar, BSK 3rd Stage, Bengaluru coming within the territorial jurisdiction of the Tribunal since long time. He submits that they have got documents to show that they are permanent residents of Bengaluru, but they could not produce the same before the Tribunal. Therefore, he prays for setting aside the judgment and awards passed by the Tribunal and remand the matter to the Tribunal, so as to enable the claimants to produce those documents and establish their case that they are residents of Bengaluru and the Tribunal has got jurisdiction to entertain their claim petitions and to dispose of the claim petitions on merit.
5. In response to his said submission Sri A.N.Krishnaswamy, learned counsel appearing for the insurance company submits that it is not enough if the claimants have furnished some address of Bengaluru with an intention to bring the claim petition within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal at Bengaluru and they have to prove and establish that they are residents of Bengaluru at the relevant point of time. The learned counsel submits, in the event of Court setting aside the judgment and awards passed by the Tribunal and remanding the matter to the Tribunal for reconsideration of the claim petitions afresh after giving opportunity to the claimants to lead additional evidence, the insurer may also be given opportunity to cross- examine the claimants on such additional evidence and also lead evidence if any on their behalf also. Hence, the following ORDER The appeals are allowed. The judgment and award passed by the Tribunal in M.V.C. Nos.7365/2011 and 7366/2011 dated 4.5.0213 are set aside and matter stands remanded back to the Tribunal with a direction to reconsider the claim petitions afresh after giving opportunities to both the parties to lead additional evidence and cross-examine on such additional evidence and on merits and in accordance with law.
Since parties were represented before this Court through learned counsel appearing for them they are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 09.01.2018 without expecting further notice from the Tribunal.
Sd/- JUDGE KLY/