High Court Karnataka High Court

H M Girish S/O Manjappa Gowda vs The Oriental Insurance Co Ltd on 3 June, 2009

Karnataka High Court
H M Girish S/O Manjappa Gowda vs The Oriental Insurance Co Ltd on 3 June, 2009
Author: Lok Adalath
HIGH COURT LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE, BANGALORE
SEFORE THE LOK ADALAT 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DANGA,LO'R}:A-'C10, 

DATED THIS THE 3"' £)AY OF JUNE 2009*-..:  

CONCILIATORS PRES?{E;NT:::"'   -r I

HON'BLE MRJUSTICE s.N,sAT\fA,NA.RAvAb";A' " " A
AND: ,   V 0_  
SRI.H.C.SHIVARAMU;,]ViEMBER__  A 

Miscellaneous First 'AQQQI¢"EI_  [ 20v(')"4"x
_L._¢_)k Agalat E60.-13.56/g09'3__  _
BETWEEN:   I  

SRI.H.M.GIRISH S/O.MANJAPPAG_OwDA., ._ ~ ' «
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, RESIDING AT~NO.10_/9, __» if .
ITI COLONY, KATHRIGUPPE MAIN"-RO.AD,"-,j;--.._   '_ '
OPPOSITE REDSON BAR &..RE'S.TAURANT,_  j ' I 
BSK 3" STAGE, BANGAIIOR'E.--s5';*::;:_.      .. APPELLANT

(BY SR1. K.T.C§'11F{U_DEVA ~P'RAsAD,,:THV,.R.sATHvAPAL, ADVOCATES)
AND: I A   I

1. THE ORIENTAL1i'JSURANCE.C.Q...LTD.,
 . YA"E'i~!IRA3 MUTT BUILDING,
'r»IO..:t99,.. 15* FLOOR, NEAR 1 1?" CROSS,
SAMPI'GE 'ROAD, :~IALI,E';IwARAM,
BANGAi;f_)RE '--= 3';..REPRESENTED BY

  ITS DI'./IS'iONALF~1AN:'#LGER.

2.77', S--RI.MANjEsH'I<UNARI,

._.  S_/QCHANDRA GOWDA,
_ " A .M'HAJOP,; 010.1185/A, 2"" PHASE,
 ,_1"7§STAGE,,CHANDRA LAYOUT, .
VIJAYA:\'A(3AR, BANGALORE -10. .. RESPONDENTS

V’ §(BY SR1. K.suREsI+, ADV.FOR R-1, M.D.ALAXANDER,
” I~|.D1N£sn SHETTY FOR R»-2)

_ FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AwARD
DATED 10-10-2003 PASSED IN MVC NO.—-I609/2001 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER,

MACT: IV ADDLJUDGE, BANGALORE (SCCH N0.’6), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM
PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

2

THIS APPEH. COMING OR FOR CONCILIATION BEFORE LOX ADAEAT AFTER
EEIMG REFERREO VIDE ORDER -BA’-{E9 26-8-20$, THE FOLLOWING ORDER IS
PASSEB.

B
The learned counse! for the eppeflent and the iearnefigounsd
for rapondent –Insurance Company atone with the

are present.

2. After due delibeetions, the mettt§c§’»AA»ise_

ha agreed ta recdve and the reiea,:>9ndenL’rw-. Insereeee

has egrad ta pay a global compehhéefien (Rupew

Ninety Thoueand’onIy),_ whichiie. ih addition to

the amount full and fined settlement of»

the claim. A jei:-ye ‘en behalf of the parties ta this

effect.

i.

3. – Iheerance Company has agreed he dwit

xthe seid 6 weeks frem the date cf preeerwon sf

TV ‘fl$efe:v_3, failing vs:ihic§£9’i’ the eeid awe nt shah carry inwmt at 9% p.a.

‘ d.a_t.e. ehdefe-nit, km the date of deposit.

Z ear’ the enhancw compmeetien amount, 50% of the

.a_;na1eh£’éhail be kw: in fixed deposit in the name of the appdlent in

..”‘.eh3¢whlafienalized Bank for a period of 3 years with the libwty to

we

K

draw the intermt on the said amount. The balance 50% of the

amcunt shall be reieasad in favour of the appellant.

.{}3 (;,*:«_£’§,{‘4§’i.,<..?t"'z_,§E_ u ;_

5. This misceilaneous first appeal — ‘_v£_i r:L.te4.f’r_i:s”v9f

‘B5! _ _._;’

the Joint Mama. The award of the Tribunal

accordingly, Draw up the Award acc;ordi:;i§:§y?”.-A.A_V A”

 'A    »

 

RR