Sathish vs Mahanthesh on 16 December, 2010

M. F.A.No.7265g201O &
Misc. CV/. 1369112010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2o10V.VV_j

BEFORE

THE I-ION'BLE MRJUSTICE H.G.RA1vLE~SH: 'jg.  

And

Migcgllgngggg Firs; Agggal N%g.7;§'_§j'_2d1IQ' -I 4'   I  I

Mi§g.gvl.1§6€¥, 1'¢O2/T~9O99
R/0 KTJRUBARAVHALLY "
 CHITRADURGA TALUK I
*  _CHI-TRADIJRGA DISTRICT

THE BRANCHMANAGER
A THE ORIENTAL"INSURANCE CO.LTD.
BRANCH 'O?a°;%'1CE;'SHARADA COMLEX
CHITRADURG-_fi_I* ..RESPONDENTS

'!~.';>"

 FILED UNDER SECTION 30 OF W.C. ACT AGAINST

"  JUDGMENT DATED 26.02.2010 PASSED IN

A IiAI~iACII_I / KANAPA/ NF/ CR:42 / 2008 ON THE FILE OF THE

I "--LAI3CUROFFICER AND COMMISSIONER FOR VVORKMENS

._C_OM.PENSAT'ION, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT, CHITRADURGA.

 -.._ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND

._s'E»EK1NG ENHANCEIVIENT OF COMPENSATION.

MISC.CVL. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 5 OF THE
LIIVIITATION ACT PRAYING TO CONDONE THE DELAY OF 111
DAYS IN FILING THE ABOVE APPEAL.



M.F./LNG. 7265g20I0 &
Misc. C1/L13691 (2010

APPEAL AND IVIISQCVL. APPLICAHON COMING ON FOR

HEARING ON LA. THES DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED T353

FOLLOVVENG:

JUDGMENT

There is a deiay of more than three

days} in filing the appeal. l\/Eisc.CvE;;:;13E%>§:.A¥j1′

for eondonation of the de1ay_’in fiiihg thgg.-“.t.a;I:§Vpea1’j’;

However, in the interest of h§eiveO’_VV:}1earfl(:i:§ the
learned counsel appearin§_i’Qr filerits
of the appeai ahd perused_ In
my opinion, arises for
determinatiorii. he purpose would
be serveit 1 [en the application-
Misc.Cv1. 1369 /:20′ Misc.CV1. 1369 1 /2010
‘V and the gappeal
JUDGE