Sri Nellira Chalankumar vs Sri T A Harisha S/O Ambu on 5 December, 2008

_ 3 _
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
QATEB! THIS THE Sm DAY OF DECEMBER 2008
BEFORE

THE HON'I3LE MRJUSTICE SUBHASH BAD!

MIBCELLAHEOUS mas? APPEAL No.14777I2mj'mv§§_j fl   _

BETWEEN

1 S21 NELLERA CHALANKUMAR
S/O Lf'I'HAIAH,AGED 28 YEARS,
I2/A'r.91Rur~:AN: VILLAGE 3.». POST,
V?RA.JPF)*F'!'ALI3K, * _   V * _   
KODAGU DISTRECJI'.    APPELLANF

(BY 3121; A K SUBBAIAH 85 A sVmNNA1s:NA--, Aa€k'a._)
AND   _  .

1 SR? T A HARISHA S30 AMBU' ~ If V
AGED ABOUT 3.-9 'a?5ga;r«:  "

BILLOF2     
PONNAPPASANTHR " ~_  _ V
vIRAJPE'i'j1*AI,IJK,._ ' 
KODAGU D'I$I*I21CT._ A

2__ 'I'HE3._if.)RlE-NTAL WSLIRANCE CO LTD
 ~ 'ABYV-{T33 aeaxca MAIWAGER,
 VEEEAJPET' {~'%R}'-*-.I_'~I(1I««I,
*  ' vIR'A1.I??.,T'45?=v: 218.

 V 3 "I"§:iE'--v0Ri'Eéé??ALT:=.:§isURANcE COMPANY,

EY  E$RAN'CH MANAGER,
« :<UN'r}AP1IR'BRANcH,
  ' MLINICIPAL ROAD,
"  K1_.¥£§DAPUR.

'3; "SR1 3 V PRAVEENA SIG VITFALLA
 __  ASED ABOUT 3:22: YEARS,
"  .._HALLIGA'I'IU VILLAGE,
PONNAMPET,
KODAGU Di3'i'RIC'1'.
 RESPONDENTS

(BY SR1: SATYANARAYANA CHALKE, ADV. FOR R1,
SF<'I.Ii'.' S INEIEHEESI»-i, ADV. FOR R2-3}

_ 3 .

4. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that. the

policy was not produced before the Tribunal, as the policy was

not with the owner and it was with the insurer.

5. Looking at the policy, it appears that the, _

claimant was covered, however, the Tribunal for ”

the poiicyi it has held that the    .'

compensation. In virzw of the appiicsgtion vfilfid bcfcaft    ;

producing the insurance polficy, I _ that an
opportunity is rcquin;-rd to flgivtéfi :t;iE’;.¢:’V::’~oyvncr produce
necessary evidence befoxe the

Acco1ding1§,:,’VAV’tb’té *éThe impugned award :3
set aside. I.Li%c.IIf20£t’7:’VTt’i’t)unal is directed to take the
insurance’: policy’ iiéotzsidcr the matter an merit after
the sides.

Judge