High Court Karnataka High Court

The New India Assurance Co Ltd vs A Jaypal Major By Age A S Transport on 3 November, 2008

Karnataka High Court
The New India Assurance Co Ltd vs A Jaypal Major By Age A S Transport on 3 November, 2008
Author: V.Gopalagowda & Swamy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

Dated this the 3rd day of November, 2008

PRESENT

THE HON-'BLE MRJUSTICE V GOPALA c«fiw'§$Li"'   '-

THE HON ‘BLE MRJUSTICE L NARAYANAVS

M FA Na.12447/2da5(??’W)

B€£W®6I1:

1

AND:

THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCEVAG{),L’i’U–~.._
INDIRANAGARA ‘ .. 5 . –«
REP. BY ITS DIVISIONAL ‘ ;%l\?25.\.(3¥5§.”R AT_’_aV.NQ.V
No.9 INFANTRY ROAD ” ‘ ‘ =
BANGALORE 1

” A1->1:>E:LLANT

(BY SR1 Ax;4i3i~1;$’fi:,6g.D’&’;)

A JAYFAL -I’vI.AJO§2’=BY% Acszrgz “A S TRANSPORT
NO.82′?”;’–6 1.31′ FL0:_:..:f–:_ ‘
RAMAMLIE?]’HYNA~GARA- MAIN ROAD
BANGALORE. 3″ _ ~

* M SMT’:’8AYAra1MA %%%%% .. –

gmgm A”3OU””{T__47 YRS

‘wf’ ;B¥LANdINAPPA

*R;’~Af;fA:v1AJ;3_1.z.flV1–LLAGE
DASANA?Ul{fA*’HOBLI
BA’NGA.L;G;2E* NORTH TQ

_V ygmisrixwi’
~A{}E!§) ABOUT 27 YRS

‘ –Si–O_BYLANJINAPPA

– R/AT MA.:ALi VILLAGE

_,,_I1AsANAPURA HGBLI

BANGALORE NORTH TQ

4 SMT PUTTAMMA
AGED ABOUT 72 YRS
W/0 BYLAPPA
R/AT MAJALI VILLAGE
DASANAPURA HGBLI
BANGALORE NORTH ‘i’Q RESPONLIVENTS

(BY SRI.R.DAIVE-IEKAN FOR R} AND
SRI.SRIPAD.V.SI-IAWRI FOR R2 85 R3)

MFA FILED LI/S 1373(1) OF Mv AC1:Ac;Ai;~3S*rt,f:*}1’I::-.JU::*;§;ér1~.»1E:qT

AND AWARD DATED: 22.7.2006 PASSED IN. am: N(j..”_6{)14’/2904 C-N

THE FILE OF’ THE XIV Am)L. JUba:E;’;’v~.coU’R*p_ GE s;v1’A_:I,”1;’ ~£:AUsE’s,’

MEMBER, MACT, ME’rR0P0Lrr_1:AN,_ AREA,.__ BANGALORE,
(SCCH.NO. 10), AWARBING r:0r§4P1§:si’:’§e_rhf(3:§ €315 1;¥S.3,56,0eo/ –
wrm INTEREST @ 6% RA F£§O’NI ‘v’-l”§¥iE PETITION TILL
DEPOSYR H .v

This Vfiéfbre the Court today,
GOPALA Gowmk, J,;%Lg3e1ive;%&:i;erongmisngz

% % kikJ UDGMENT
The _cc>rrec{I’1e$s’of judgment passed by the

‘A{:s’§fci<%%11ts"M* .C1aiifiiS""'Ti'ibunai and Ceurt cf Small Causes.

Ba1″‘1’ga}{;’>.§cz:’V referred to as ‘me Tribunai’ for short in

v C N§.5Q.1.4{2oo4 in ailowing the claim of the claimants

~ cdmfiensatien at Rs.3,56,000/- with interest at 6% from

\w/

_:*first resj;):;_r1de11~’£,_fiieured. The said condition mcorperated in the

” -«z–1i111*p_vu’gr1ed jddgment is, thelefere, deleted. It is open for the irzserer

\ .,.,;q..¢?é3<,, fifl§§\,'»';»gc0ver from the owner. W

4

insured was also a party befere the Tribunal. The cerrectness of
the finding is not chaflenged by him. Therefore, {he fasterflib
upon the insurance company is in conformity with thefde_’eiei9’n of
the Supreme Court in NATEONAL INSURANCE
SWARAN SINGH 55 OTHERS (MR 20o4_se..__153e1)%
reads as under: 1 A’ d’ V H A .

“99. It is, therefore, evident ‘the heredri
before that the liability of rlje satisfy the
decree at the frst instaace””:.;£1d. ‘dig awarded amount
from the owner or driver the field for 21
But it is netvVvprQV1_3ferf:11di§_; ther1;?1E1:ive$rfiT1;d pertion

1:; the judgnienn

3. Ir;-this of eiritter, it is proper for this Court to

‘the €.11if§dei”3;§:l&T1€d from the judgment paragraph 16

While… the insurer to recover the amount from the

5

4. The amount in deposit itzcluding “me statutQ§9g;’:”‘d§posit
shall be transmitted to the Tribunal to enable pg
withdraw the amount. ‘}I’}:1e insurer shall
amount wiihin four weeks from the défie ‘

erder.

aka?