Loading...

Karuppanthodi Janaki vs T.Narayani on 16 July, 2008

Kerala High Court
Karuppanthodi Janaki vs T.Narayani on 16 July, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

CRP.No. 3333 of 2001(D)



1. KARUPPANTHODI JANAKI
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs

1. T.NARAYANI
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.V.SURENDRAN

                For Respondent  :SRI.P.G.JEROME

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.JOHN MATHEW (RETD.JUDGE)

 Dated :16/07/2008

 O R D E R
                    JUSTICE K.JOHN MATHEW
            (RETD.JUDGE, HIGH COURT OF KERALA)
                                AND
           BARRISTER SRI.M.P.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
        (SENIOR ADVOCATE, HIGH COURT OF KERALA)
           ===========================
                       C.R.P.No.3333 of 2001
           ============================
                Dated this the 16th day of July, 2008


                              AWARD


     Petitioners and respondents have settled the matter in

O.S.No.536/1989 of the Munsiff Court, Kozhikode in which they

are parties. A compromise statement has been produced.

Accordingly parties have agreed that the properties involved in

the suit can be divided into metes and bounds. A plan prepared

by the qualified surveyor is attached along with the compromise

statement. Plots 1 and 3 in the plan along with the house therein

shall be jointly allotted to the share of defendants 13 to 19 who

are petitioners in CRP. Plot 2 will be jointly allotted to the

plaintiff, defendants 2 to 5, 7 and 8 who are respondents 1, 3, 5,

7, 8 and supplemental respondents 14 to 28           who are legal

representatives of the respondents 2 and 4, according to their

respective shares. Plot 4 will be allotted to the 20th defendant

who is the 13th respondent in CRP. Plot 5 will be jointly allotted

to defendants 9 to 12 who are respondents 9 to 12 and Plot 6 will

C.R.P.No.3333/2001
                                   2

be allotted to the 6th defendant who is the 6th respondent in CRP.

Parties have also agreed that the house and the appurtenants

situated in the plaint schedule property, which has been

excluded in the preliminary decree will be exclusively given to

defendants 13 to 19.       The other defendants or their legal

representatives namely, supplemental respondents 14 to 28, will

not have any right over the house and appurtenants thereto.

Parties will be given absolute possession of the respective

properties allotted to them       as per the plan.    Parties have

decided to give up their claim for mesne profit. The compromise

is recorded and the decree of the lower court will stand modified

accordingly and a fresh decree passed in accordance with this

compromise. The compromise statement as well as the plan will

form part of this award.

      The civil revision petition is settled as above.



                                 K.JOHN MATHEW
                      (RETD.JUDGE, HIGH COURT OF KERALA)




                           M.P.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
                  (SENIOR ADVOCATE, HIGH COURT OF KERALA)

dvs


? IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

+MFA.No. 172 of 2000()



#1. M/S.UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs

$1. M.S.SUNILKUMAR
                       ...       Respondent

!                For Petitioner  :SRI.R.S.KALKURA

^                For Respondent  :SRI.V.J.JOHN

*Coram
 The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN

% Dated :10/07/2008

: O R D E R

M.N.KRISHNAN, J.

————————–

M.F.A. No. 172 OF 2000

———————

Dated this the 10th day of July, 2008

JUDGMENT

This appeal is preferred against the award passed by the

Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Alappuzha, in OP(MV) 1599/93. It

relates to a claim for compensation on account of the damages

sustained to the vehicle in a road accident. The Tribunal had

considered the said factum in para 10 of the award. The Tribunal

accepted Ext.A13 estimate as such and awarded a compensation of

Rs.98,435/-. It is very clear that Ext.A13 is only an estimate with

respect to the value of the spare parts and repairing charges.

Nothing is produced to show that in pursuance of the same spare

parts had been purchased and the vehicle had been repaired and

that amount has been spent. It is a matter that has to be proved and

it is not proper for any court to award damages on the mere estimate

or an estimate submitted. Therefore the award under challenge

suffers from serious infirmity and it is liable to be set aside. I do so.

The MFA is allowed and the award under challenge is set

aside and the case is remanded back to the Tribunal for fresh

MFA No.172/00 2

consideration after permitting all parties concerned to adduce

documentary as well as oral evidence in support of their respective

contentions. Since the claimant has not appeared before this court,

it is desirable that a notice is issued to the claimant from the Tribunal

before the matter is proceeded with at the expenses of the Insurance

Company.

Parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on

21.8.08.

M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE
vps

MFA No.172/00 3

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. More Information