1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO.10729 OF 2010 IN F.A.NO.208 OF 2010. _______________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | _______________________|_______________________________________ CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J. Date : 18.04.2011. 1. Heard. 2. The claimant had filed Motor Accident Claims Petition for compensation on account of the disability sustained by him in an accident. The Tribunal awarded the claimant compensation of Rs.64,000/- (Rupees sixty four thousand) with future interest at the rate of Rs.6% p.a. Being dissatisfied with the inadequate compensation awarded to the claimant, the claimant has filed the present Appeal. During the pendency of the appeal, the claimant has filed Civil Application No.10729/2010, seeking production of additional 2 evidence in the shape of documents contending therein that after the claim petition was decided, the applicant was operated again on or about 10.5.2009. The said operation was sequel to the injury sustained by him in the accident dated 9.4.1999. The said documents are the bills issued by Daule Hospital, the certificate issued by Doctor and other certificates and bills relating to the said Hospital. Mr.Deshmukh, learned counsel contends that the same are relevant and material for effective adjudication of the lis. According to the learned counsel the said documents would substantiate the fact that the applicant had incurred future expenses on account of the said accident which is a subject matter of the claim petition. 3. Per contra, Mr.Deshpande, learned counsel for the Insurance Company and Mr.Pallod, learned counsel for the owner of the vehicle oppose the application on the ground that once the claim petition was filed and the same is decided, now the applicant would not be entitled to file such application and the documents. It 3 was further contended that even pleadings were there in the original claim petition regarding the future expenses that he would incur but had not proved the said fact by examining the Doctor or any other evidence. Now the applicant can not be permitted. 4. The documents on record show that they are subsequent in point of time i.e. after the claim petition is decided by the Tribunal. What would be the efficacy of those documents would be decided after the evidence is led. At this stage, this Court is only concerned about the relevancy of the documents. The said documents prima facie appear to be concerned with the claimant and the fact that he was operated. The Doctor's certificate is also on record. The applicant has produced the original documents along with the application. In light of that, I do not see any impediment to exercise my powers U/o 4l Rule 27 of the C.P.C. and allow the production of said documents. 5. In the result, the Civil Application is allowed. The documents as shown along with the 4 list attached to the Civil Application are allowed to be produced on record. The Civil Application is accordingly disposed of. (S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.) Dt.18.04.2011. asp/office/Ca10729.10