United India Insurance Co Ltd vs Hongaiah S/O Late Mariyaiah on 30 June, 2009

2

(By Sri: GIRISH B BALADARE, ADV FOR R1)
(BY sm. v s MANIKA, ADV. FOR R2)

THIS MISCHCVL. FILED UNDER SEC?IGN’:”~.15*~1V 40:? .
CPCP PRAYING TO PERMIT ‘rHE;”‘R1.To _WfF}i_I)RAW
RS.12,000/- AMOUNT wmcH ISV:,A_DEPQSI’i’}3′.D._ BY’=
APPELLANT IN THIS comm AS STATIJTQRY DEPOSIT 51%;)”-

THIS MIsc.cmL COMINGQN FOR QR{1ER–$;”‘THIS

DAY THE comm’ MADE THE FOLLQWING: A_ A-

This appficajjon 1 injured-

ciaimant withdrawal of
Rs. the appeal. Having heard the

learned éavfiplicant and that of the

respargjdent —- Company who does not oppose

the same is allowed. The 1st

iéfntjtled to withdraw the sum of

Rs. 4′ deposit. Regisuy is directed to forthwith

viihe amount to the MAC!’ concerned.

35/1%:

KS Judge