Karnataka High Court
Smt Gangamma vs Sanjaypal on 18 September, 2008
W<é&'%"E'&%}%. MGM mam
.o'.'w.@wI:I""<a 1-1 uzzxvwv'i5= at
wwwm% mmuwmltmmm WEMIW auwmw WE" flflflwflfifififi. M§%M""§ Klmfififigwf «mg fififiwfiiyfiififi W§€?v§"'§ flj:§::f:§%m§%\VEw {W3 W.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF
CJIRCUTI' BENCI§:AT--(}[I{',}.32§;Eéf£§§.fig A
PRESENTQ V: % % % V
THE HONBLE MR.VJijsT1cE I§..L.-.MAN'§:T UN1§TE~i k
THE HONBLE M1é.};'U's*r§(:E ' E§:JLf¥,?\:fADI G. RAMESH
DATED_.5§'E{I1S\ mg I5AY_V~QEf'VSE?PEMBER, 2008
% §a%1é?g;§%NO§j::24 122/ 2006
BETw1e:E;:€:T.k'%L'ji:% " '%
1. <§_'TI»*I.§'i';§§r;tagouda
Hubballi, 49' yéara,
Occ: Househcéld work,
_ 'V
Baééyajaé @ Basappa s/0
i'v€gfiz.g1'1tagoiuda Hubballi, major,
--_0CC2' Cfidlié, R/0 Karadi,
b?o'th are R/at Maigur building,
j road, Bijapur. .. Appeflanis
{By Advomte Sri.Umesh Vjvhmadapur)
1; 'Sanjaypal s/o S.N.Pa1,
29 years, Dec: Market Mangfi,
Swara} Mazda Ltd.,
W -- A2. ' ' W "Q-qu%»a*Vem§4i'?€;§
. . ~ . -w . - ~ ' " ' §'W$\3¢./§**?x5.e5*'*h!¢"nz§\'5§s %i"§'rS'?e.£?§'"?i' 'éw'5».fl5%u.:iH'§x3$ 'mi? mmmmmimgwa !!"'fiM$§% mwmaw @m9"¥'"Wu\1*§¥C§"fi.<F%§fi'~%¥'%.aW& Wfiw
gwwma WW' mmmwmammm !£""L!i%{f3'fiW§E mwwmé M¢"\\V' mmmwmmmmm i§"H'§..WPi""% mwawww. N'? W-.W%
Vital Darshan, Palmeer Road,
Iviangalore.
2. The Branch Manager, 1
The New India Assurance Co. "L_t<:i;--, _ . 2
Bijapur. V V' "I5§e.sp9111dem.$ v
( Advocate Smt. fox; T_R' --2) :
(R-1 .. Notice dzispensed v;r.iff.h)'»
This Mm«;;sj:'uec1 uncier secL173%(;3') of MV Act against the
judgment 'and 5';faward_ datrgd if; .9.8.2006 passed in MVC
No.57'? /013:" 0:1"thé=.'fi1é'»b%f'"th¢ ?E?ri'.* Distxict Judge, Member,
MAC'F~I_,M__V B'ijap1i.§_,_ Vpa:¢1y% "a11;;)WI'£ng the claim petition for
compéjilseiticri. andj enhéncement of compensation.
~ on for orders this day,
MANJUNATH J. "de1.iVt:'1f§.€1 the f(}110WiI1gZ-
JUDGMENT
‘- is by the claimants seeking enhancement of
awarded by the MAC1’, Bijapur in MVC
‘2..jLjv:I’i<V)'.;';«'Z"?'V,v/V"If)2 dated 9.8.2006. Since R»-2 insurance company
éafisfied the award of the tribunal, we are of the opinion
that there is no necessity for us to traverse the entire
pleadings and evidence of the parties and that we have ':0
{Q}//"