High Court Karnataka High Court

The Divisional Manager vs Master Mahadeva S/O D.P.Kuse … on 13 December, 2010

Karnataka High Court
The Divisional Manager vs Master Mahadeva S/O D.P.Kuse … on 13 December, 2010
Author: L.Narayana Swamy


M1’~’AH¢.i2£9’3:’wJ’?as!V)

His wshcr ,1 xmtuzml guardian,
ELP. Knse Gcawda,

81¢. D.K. Pu%d<: Gowda,
Rlat No.21 , Weavara Colsmy,
Ballala Road,

Srinagar,

Bangalore – 560 050

2. Manjulal Manon
Rlat Apartment I§£!,303+,””‘ — ‘”
Block-X,Heritage.E’.ata;te¢.
Doddaballapur Road,-1 V

(By Shri%-R- %
for M/3.

v First Awal is filed under

‘.;.—L’7.’3£.1) of ‘}&’Aet against the judment and
‘award _ dated 18.11.2006 passed in MVC.

Ho’}5_5’23:f3ACfl4 ¢:_in the me of me m Additional Judge,
Courtrof’ Causes Member, Motor Accidenm

” ” Claims Mtmopolitan Area, %a1ore (SCCH
. 736.18) a compensation of Re.90,00fi/- with
6% p.a. from the date of mtiticm till

This appeal coming on far Admission this day,
” «mutt delivered the following:

hfiék Ne. 1W’3€200′}’

The appeal by the w11ant~~inaumwe. A Av ” k
challenging the judmem a.n;i_

dated 18.11.2006 passed in ‘fan
the graund that the chéggige “the was

dmhon’ oumd andthe to him by

RPAD but thy: with a postal

return ts sander’.

:25.’ ~ _ the written statement,

vizhg &&&&& $1 the written. atatsment due to

wmputer, wins’ 11 did not indicata

I was mvahd’ ‘ , on the basis cf the wmng

. provided by the cemputcr, signed the

atsmmemt admittim the policy. The anmal

at that: policy net being valid and currcznt was

@<

K:

.. M».M,==/,/»vwuw¢w:ww»w /J

_ l£t~’AKa.12693f209i?(.!d\r’)
reamed aitcrr judgment and award. In that: written

statement cbjecflcns are also net czmtcndcd in 0f

the arm: occurred in than wmputm. Hen§eV. ‘§the3

learned counsel for tm appeflant-kmuraneej:

makes a. prayer for wanding ba¢k~ 1′ V’

Tribunal’

3.

abmxt fix; for which the appellant

has may p1;és£1uc::;VVi:.V dgficument bcfcre thc Tribunal.

At aI1;;}u1hciha=u’~*t: furnished document befcxre this

% of carrwenienm. Though this matter

V is back, no additional documenta
filed. Under these eirtmmatanom for the
the part of the appellant, the same cannot be

AT mfiaizmd back ta the Tribunal. At the stage of

admission ifiaacif, the. appeal stands riismsw.

K

‘ix

The service at ‘

am. Ra.

4. The amount in

transmitted to the Tribunal mwraga. {

E” “” 1′.