The New India Assurance Co Ltd vs N Venkataraman on 29 January, 2009

IN THE HIGH COURT 013* KARNATAKA,   

DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY O1f'.JA}RJARY,' 2{)6§    %  2

PRESENT ' _ V % % %

THE I-ION'BLE MR.   
5ND  Z   

THE HONBLE MR.  '4S§5£}é'ffs*NARAYANA

M,If';A.NC3*.'368i§/  m»m  M
c/vi M;§F.A.% cams NC)._23£jj_j.3003

 

    

M/S. THE HEW INDIA ASS"¥;.IRA.l'#"CE co LTD
MISSION ROAD," BANGALORE}? W 27
BY DULY 'VCONSTITUTED A'l"I'ORNEY

  A ~   APPELLANT

 '  'V._ (BYv."'S;RI.KSURYANARAYANA RAG, ADVOCATE)

AND 

 1 N vE14Iia'A?rARAMAN

 S] (.3 NARAYANA SWAMY
' ..  ABOUT 66 YEARS

  --I.r,%TsALA

 W/0 VENKATARAMAN
 AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS

BOTH ARE R/A NO.A-303,
NAVNI GAURAV CO~OPERA'I'IVE
HOUSING SOC1E'I'Y, ROAD No.2

M?

 



ea'

PENDSENAGAR (NEAR ANTHRA BANK)
DOMBIVILLI EAST, THANE DIST
3 <3 SHAFEE AHAMED 
s/0 KHADER MOHIYUDDIN
R/O EMAMNAGAR
BEPHUR ROAD, DAVAN(}ER_E _  "   
   121=:s1?o"r~;r3'E1~4*z*s

(BY SR1 SRIPAD V sHAsTRI,,-.A--fi§_ro€:.ATE FCR--.R1':2)

THIS MFA is FILEDU/S i73(1) 0Ff_MV Acr AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AwARD_,EA'r§E:D-:'22;1.;,V  PASSED IN
MVC NO.}.536/97 j'Q;v THE 'F*II,E.0,1€=--frHE ABEL. JUDGE 52-.
MEMBER,  {;'1_OUR'I'  'V VSMALL CAUSES,
BAN(.'irALORE,_ SQECHC ;\i.o;5,,' PAE,2TI.Y {ALLOWING THE CLAIM

PETITION FOR C€.;)R_fIPENSA'Pi'?£)f§;*-- 
M.F.A. (:R6BEg_3,,_g_;.i=;5,*2Ae£)3:  VA
BETWEEN'-."  "  "

1 N VENI{ATA'RAMAN_ 
A;GE§:) ABOUTV66 YEARS,

.. jg'; <3,' ..N£aRAYA§IAS--'u'J'AMY

'  "~:.A1"HSALA ' 
, '~"AGE'D"Es,1 YEARS,
K W'/0 NAEj;_'.A'fANASWAMY
BOTRARE R/O A-303,
' , ,NAvN£ GAURAV CO--OPERATfVE
v 'HQUSING socrmv, ROAD 2,
 * PENDASENAGAR, DOMBIVILLI EAST
 THANE DISTRICT ~ 421 201

 CROSS OBJECTORS

(BY SR1 SHRIPAI) V SHASTRI, ADVOCATE)

P

 



AND

A I THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE (3QLTD  

REGIONAL OFFICE
UNITY BUILDING ANNEXE
MISSION ROM)

BANGALORE 27  
BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGE}?

2 SHAFEE AHAMEIZ} 
MAJOR,   5 
3/0 C. KHADER MOHIY'aOI);';N..   
R/OIMAMNAGAR  I ' 
BETHUR ROAD .
DAVANGEIRE' ~  _ ~ 

    _  RESPONDENTS

THIS MFA,CI€f),B iS'"F_IVLEQ__._UVV/O 43 R 22 OF CPC
AGAINST  I..JjtJDc}"I'~jAEN*I*...2a.ND AWARD DA'l'ED:22. 3.03
PASSED IN MY!) IsIOV.'I.536/9f7'~--«0I~I THE FILE OF' THE ADDL.
JUOGE an MEMBER, 'MAC'I§V,._(:OUm OF SMALL CAUSES,
BANGALORE',SOOH'-NO3,,_ PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM
PETITION FOR - I COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
ENHAN(3EM_EN'i' OF COMPENSATION.

  and 'Oross Objection coming on for

'VOa1fingV1:i1is'Iday',---.SREEDILAR mo J., delivered the

JUDGMENT

% »f_’ It reported that the cases are settled in Lokadaith.

of the settlement, the appeals are dismissed as not

H V fiitgscd. The liberty is given to the appellant and the cross

objectors to revive the appeal and the cross agapeai, .

instructions from the client is found to be = – :: b ‘-