Shaiivahana Road
3 S.K.Kumar
m THE HIGH comrr or KARNATAKA AT nAmALom:
DATED THIS Tim 1022- my or NOVEMBER %
PRESENT % % M' u % A
THE HOWBLE 1\vIR.JUS'I'ICE v.GemL§ A "
ms HoN'BL£:
narscmasw APPE_;g;_L
BETWEEN:
The United '
Now.rep.; by itS'vD::rf:p:.1 ; 1\.dfai:£:_.ag¢z*--
Regional "Ofi':§(:'e,» * '
Bar1g1aoxe; %
. . . . Appeilarzt
(By Sr; ;'i~',Ir;A1*isI"i}eu'i;._'1€x:*iir. fz>z~ Sri A.M.Venka1:esh, Adv.)
"
"
" « . "R/0."D.No.439/ 2
id. A
V " Nazarbad
" "'I\éys0re.
S] o.Kempajah
R / a. Kempasiddana Palya
Sidavanda Post, Nelamangala
Mg
person is not covered under the policy, therefore the
contention urged on behalf of the insurance
is that the respondent/owner is liable for '
compensatien to the respor1der1t/ tiioiicl
gatuitous passenger is not at
available records it is crystal
lorry canying the spi:’i§zVma11’uE’s_et1ii”e§i by “M/«slyezdi
Distillezfies. ‘I’he_ is booked
by M/s. under by
no deemed to be a
gratuitous the ofiending vehicie.
Hence,’ the the Insurance Company
3’is.mae1e’ liable jto pé{y”‘t’he compensation.
V above discussion, the findings and
‘ reasbns reeoeded by the Tribunal on the contentious
impugned judgment cannot: be interfered
‘£33’ this Court in exercise of its appellate
ijurisdicfion and power in this Appeal filed by the
x insurer. Further this Court cannot direct the insurer to
pay and reeever the awarded eempensatien amount
\M/
the prayer in this regard is rejected. The appeal is iiable
to be dismissed as being devoid of merit.
9. Accordingly,” the appeal is >
statutory deposit shall} be Z
forthwith. The Appeliant shag depeéit V tlae’V” .
eompensatien amount within date
of receipt of the copy of
_e Aggjé
s1;/bp3v1o/ jfiégg