High Court Karnataka High Court

Mallamma W/O Chikkamanchegowda vs Shekara S/O Chennegowda on 6 February, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Mallamma W/O Chikkamanchegowda vs Shekara S/O Chennegowda on 6 February, 2010
Author: N.K.Patil And Gowda
1
IN THE HIGH COURT 01? KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 

IPRESENT:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUsTIoE N.p.K;'Il.lA1'IIT  H  A

AND 

THE HON 'BLE MRJUSTICE   A

M.F.A.No. 429d6-§r2006e 

BETWEEN:

1.

Manamma,_( d:edend'o9-o5éo2oos)p;= 

W/o. ch:kkaaznaEcheg_¢=wda;~'1;.  Q
Aged 6£l?yea;?:"s_._. . "  ,  

W/'o;'e'.Lat"e Chi:kkther11megoWda,
Agedfil   ' ~

  ,. 
D/o. Late"Chilazkathemmegowda,
Aged 2 yeaairs. V

'V  A .A_,ll1lR€i§l5eseh{ed by mother appellant N 0.2,
 _ All z=.;5e».re.s1::.:ng No.2168,

,  ._1«~'='ilC1*oss',*p,Hosahalli,
'  Malvldyla, City.

S1'11,<;e the LRs of Appellant No.1

V " * «are already on record as Appellants

3 =  $310. 2 and 3 bringing LRS on record does not

arise as there are no other LRS.

E»

... Appellants

'Wick



 

4
claim petition, on a technical ground. On account of the
dismissal of the claim petition, the appellants_:l_l'have

presented this appeal, seeking appropriate re}i_ef.""    ~

5. We have heard the learned l'app'earing it

for the appellants and the learned.Counsel'.-"appearil;ng'forg

the respondent No.2 -- Insij'rai1ce Co;._forV':co'sE1siderable

length of time. Th is” served and

unrepresented.

6. _p._e*rusa’_’l the impugned judgment
and award. critical’ evaluation of the material on
recordgfljt r eyggérgfgegl the Tribunal has committed

material irregularity in lldislrriissing the claim petition of the

p_appeil«ant_Ts –up_clair”r1ai3.ts’without assigning cogent and Valid

when the oral evidence of P.Ws.l and 2 and

d¢cur:1entai%32_§5v:dence at Exs.P.1 to 13.7 and Exs.R.l to

wasnvery much available. The Tribunal except

to the exhibits in para 6 of the judgment has not

V’ -fgldiseussed nor assigned any reason nor recorded finding of

%_W

J

JUDGE

6
and to pass appropriate order in accordance with law,
after affording opportunity of hearing to the appellants
and the second respondent — Insurance Co. personally or

through their Advocate. Liberty is reserved».t:to_l”‘–the

appellants and second respondent to lead

evidence if they so desire.

Tribunal is directed to__ disp’o_se* of

expeditiously as possible, an louterl lirigiit of six

months from the date’oaf._’i=-ece-ipt§V– of the judgment.

Office is .d.;:.35:;:ected§:to uoriginal records to the

/; sd/..:

JTUDGE

Sd/-