High Court Karnataka High Court

The Branch Manager The New India … vs K T Muralidhar S/O Late … on 9 June, 2009

Karnataka High Court
The Branch Manager The New India … vs K T Muralidhar S/O Late … on 9 June, 2009
Author: Lok Adalath
1

HIGH COURT LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE, BANGALOR
BEFORE THE LOX ADALAT '

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DAYED THIS THE 9"' DAY OF JUNE 2009 

CONCILIATORS PRESENT:

I-¥ON'BLE MRJUSTICE s.N.sATvANAR.Av.A1NA"-E.::  "

AND    ,
SRLPRASAD SUBBANNA, MElVfi3E--R'    

mun

 

Misceiianeoug Firs; Apsggai   3

 1a, 2009,, A  

BETWEEN:

THE BRANCH MANAGER,   ;
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE cO.LTD.,__   I

DIVISIONAL O1=I=Ic_E,_,UDHAi<AAIANDALAM,-- ~  
(OOTY), TAMIL NADU, NQW RERTD. BYITS '
REGIONAL MANAGER, .     

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE cO.L":fD~...,,   ~
REGIONAL 0FFICE,'UNITY BUILDING AN 
P.KALINGA RAO RAO'D,_ * V " A »-- 

BANGALORE -- S_6D 027;» V ' ._   " .. APPELLANT
"  SRI. A,N;I(.Iaz«sH NA SWAMY, ADVOCATE)
AND}

 I,  K.T;MII'RALIDHAjR, S/O.LATE THIMIVIEGOWDA,

NOW AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,
 « R/A SREENIVASA NILAYA,
 KIKKERI ROAD, K.R.PET TOWN,
 MAN DYA DISTRICT.

 ,2';  S.RAH.TD4;:', S/O.SYED NORANMED,

 -.fNOw AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
 _NO.+'<It9, SUN MERI SILL SUNROCK
HOUSE, UDHAKANANDALAM (OOTY),

 _ "TAMIL NADU STATE.

 H.SHI\/AKUMAR, S/O.|-IANUMANTHAIAH, MASOR,

M/SSHIVAKUMAR AGENCIES, NO.1/167,



2

CMC MARKET, UDHAKAMANDALAM (OOTY)
TAMIL NADU STATE. .. RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. A.R.Sl-IARADAMBA, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1
8: M..M..MADHUSUDHAN,. ADV, FOR R2 AND R3)

MFA FILED o/5.173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT5AR–.D_”AwARD
DATED 3o«~11-2005 PASSED IN MVC NO.79S/2000 ON THE FILE OF ‘THE MEMEER,

ADDL.MACT, SRIRANGAPATNA, AWARDING A COMPENSAT1ON_”QF –Rs.7_,4n,oo.o/–“‘.._

WITH INTEREST AT 6% PA. FROM THE DATE OF PETITIQN TILL D’EPfoSIT*. _

THIS APPEAL COMING om FOR coNcILIATIoN–eE.P=oR=E LoI<'- ADALAT'EPAETER"'*

BEING REFERRED VIDE ORDER DATED 26-3-2009, 'THE FOI.;l…0WING %:__)RDER'._IS
PASSED. .r. *. = -~-so ; I ',

coNcILIATIoisIwIc.oa_DERT.I A
The learned counsel for_"':ythe–'_VA~fappel!a_nt'"einsurance Company
along with the representativetl'iev.'"lea'IV'ned counsei for

respondents are

2. After doe matter is settled. The appellant –
Insurance Cornpaény pay and the respondent No.1
agreed togreceivex e__Vs’u1mA”ofT Rs.5,”73,000/– (Rupees Five Lakh

Seventyfhreé’A:’Th’oIISandHfonly), with interest at 6% p.a. instead of

Rs.7,V4’0.VI0-QLl]+T-Twlthinterest at 6% p.a. awarded by the Tribunal, in

and final se’ttl-ernent of the claim. A joint memo is filed on behalf

A to this effect.

The AppelEant– Insurance Company has agreed to deposit the

All’VEfL’*-saifdvafroount less what has already been deposited within 6 weeks

“I

I1
.3

from the date of preparation of Award. The amount in deposit shail

be transferred to the Tribunal.

4. This misceilaneous first appeai stands disposed

the Joint Memo. The award of the Tribu_r1ai»_shai.i

accordingiy. Draw up the Award accordingiy. . 3 A

RR