{"id":263366,"date":"2010-11-12T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-11-11T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-india-insurance-company-vs-sri-lakkappa-so-jaji-rangappa-on-12-november-2010-2"},"modified":"2018-09-20T22:42:21","modified_gmt":"2018-09-20T17:12:21","slug":"united-india-insurance-company-vs-sri-lakkappa-so-jaji-rangappa-on-12-november-2010-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-india-insurance-company-vs-sri-lakkappa-so-jaji-rangappa-on-12-november-2010-2","title":{"rendered":"United India Insurance Company vs Sri Lakkappa S\/O Jaji Rangappa on 12 November, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
United India Insurance Company vs Sri Lakkappa S\/O Jaji Rangappa on 12 November, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: B.V.Nagarathna<\/div>\n
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE\nDATED THIS THE 12?\" DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2010\n\nBEFORE\n\nTHE HONBLE MRS. JUSTECE B.v.NAGARA5?fHN;_A-A Of.  _\n\nM.F.A.No.3277\/20g9nNC)_- ~  .-- .:'jj.,   O'\n\nBETWEEN:\n\nUNITED INDIA INSURANCE coMPA1~\u00ab1y\"--_V_\nJAYADEVA COMPLEX, B.H.RoAp A\nTUMKUR, NOW REPTD. BY  \nREGIONAL OFFICE  \nSHANKARANARAYANA BUELDING \nM.G.ROAD, BANGALORE?{560_OQ;1, \"\nBY ITS MANAGER \"   \n\n... APPELLANT\n\n{By \n\n    ..... \n<\/pre>\n
 ‘ 11.,” ” .. Sm ‘3;AI\u00a7K.A_pPA<\/p>\n
 AG,1’i:D’AE:oUT 52 YEARS
\n‘vs\/0 JAJJOIIRANGAPPA<\/p>\n
   2. SM:*’.pUTTAMMA<\/p>\n
A ‘E ._AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS<\/p>\n
T  _AW\/O LAKKANNA<\/p>\n
BOTH RESIDENTS OF
\nGAJAMARANHALLI VILLAGE
\nSHIRA TQ., TUMKUR DIST.\n<\/p>\n
3. SRI.M.D.JANNAPPA
\nMAJOR BY AGE
\nWW,\u00bb-“”1<\/p>\n
S\/O DODDA HONNAPPA
\nMUGANAHALLY
\nGULIGENAHALLY POST
\nSIRA TQ., TUMKUR DIST.\n<\/p>\n
\n
[By S11′: C.M.KEMPEGOWDA, ADV. FOR .\n<\/p>\n
K.HANUMANTHARAYAPPA, ADV. FORVRAS). .’ ‘~<\/p>\n
THIS MFA IS FILED U\/S  OF’ vi\/Xe  AGAINST
\nTHE JUDGMENT DATEE.g7.0\u00a2iI;2o0jS EASSED IN’ WCA\/CR-
\n108\/2007′ ON THE  OFFICER AND
\nCOMMISSIONER  F’OR_… Vleoii\/IPENSATION,
\nTUMKUR D\ufb01\ufb01\ufb02g\ufb01 \u00a7T\ufb01MKU\u00a7N7\u00bbW\ufb02mMMunNG A
\nCOl\\\/IPENSA’lf:I(‘j1l\\i_.._Qi?v-I{S..’3-313?,Goijf-“‘lWITH INTEREST @ 12%
\nRA __ h’i I<\/p>\n
This a~ppe.sl’lc’omTii1gl”for Hearing this day, the court
\ndelivered the followingjo  l”\n<\/p>\n
f*0UDGMENT<\/p>\n
.fl.lTl;1iSV is \ufb01led by the insurance company by<\/p>\n
 -c hallenlginlga. lithe order dated 27.1.2009 passed in<\/p>\n
 V’  108\/07 by the Labour Officer<\/p>\n
–.\u00e9i-ncl’:Commissione1′ for Wo:rkmen’s Compensation, Tumkur<\/p>\n
” -\u00ab lfjilsfrict, Tumkur (herein after referred to as<\/p>\n
uW.C.C0mmissi0ner), raising the following Substantial<\/p>\n
question of law: iii
\n,.M”‘<\/p>\n
Whether the Commissioner was justified
\nholding that there was relationship of empl&oyee”‘\u00abk7
\nand employer between the deceased   is
\ninsured contrary to the specific stand__o..f \u00ab A
\nof the said relationship by theWinsure–d
\nand also granting compensatien   ”\n<\/p>\n
decision of the Apex Court relied’ on gtheggg
\nappellant and saddling liability on tl1e_app-ellant<\/p>\n
to pay the compzegrlsation lwith””-.interestweven
\nthough admittedly = A d.ece_ase’d fvwas  travelling<\/p>\n
sitting on the heap in the ‘thailer?\n<\/p>\n
2. For    the parties shall be<\/p>\n
referred in ‘telm’s:,or  before the W.C Commissioner.<\/p>\n
3. Respondent   2 herein who are claimants<\/p>\n
.’*.f:il\u20acd the cl_airr1__ petition ….. seeking compensation in respect of<\/p>\n
son Manjunatha in a road traffic accident<\/p>\n
that.ocourredV’cjon.?V\u00a5l.1.2006 when the deceased was travelling<\/p>\n
in traiie.rl”Aiwhich was attached to the tractor bearing<\/p>\n
 llx\\”o.KAs-Q6413′-9809~9810 belonging to the first respondent the<\/p>\n
 of the tractor. It was the case of the claimants that<\/p>\n
‘ythleilr son was employed as a coolie earning a sum of<\/p>\n
 xRs.l50\/– per day and that on the date of the accident the<\/p>\n
deceased was travelling on the trailer on a load of manure.<\/p>\n
ii fl<\/p>\n
__w.w”\n<\/p>\n
\n
At about 12.00 noon on Sira–~Changavara Road the driver<\/p>\n
drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent mann.elr~_as a<\/p>\n
consequence of which the deceased who was s_iitti’ng.f_’on”the* _<\/p>\n
heap manure fell down and sustained grievous and 2<\/p>\n
was shifted to Victoria Hospital whpereph\u00e9ye jj.succ:umber3*tol<\/p>\n
injuries on 13.1.2006.\n<\/p>\n
4. After service of  resisted the
\nclaim in respect of  respondent
\nherein as t1’1\u20ac3’Ol}i;”i%1\u00e9l’ oftgth\ufb01iyehicleuij\u00e9tpl\ufb01\ufb01gired and they filed
\ntheir   denying that the
\ndeceasedyVas.:  thelllinjsured. According to the
\nowner of  was not his employee and<\/p>\n
therefore,  was notaliab’le to pay any compensation and<\/p>\n
 ideath vyalsvvoniaccount of the fault of the deceased.<\/p>\n
  :also took up similar contentions that the<\/p>\n
deceased was not an employee of the insured. Therefore, the<\/p>\n
 liability cannot be fastened on the insured.<\/p>\n
  0′ H On the basis of the aforesaid pleadings, the W.C.<\/p>\n
 Commissioner raised the following issues for his<\/p>\n
COI1Sid\u20ac1’at10I1I
\n5<\/span><\/p>\n
2 E3’BCS1-)0\u00a7\ufb01\u00b033.J 3<\/p>\n
1. eazssmdda me): ainozamznqi {said taaiiao\ufb02\u00e9da axowdzdgl  <\/p>\n
eaarcsadda 5323633 \ufb01\ufb01zfodz\ufb01e?\n<\/p>\n
2. 1289 game 23\u00a2? asaas mowmqs eaa\ufb01da <\/p>\n
m\ufb01ma\ufb01\ufb01sdo\u00e9 5’3c:l3E’3U9hCg60&3Jd?3%l \u20ac_9?.1″>\u00a7T.3Te),C5}’.’_3\u00a7 253:?-t’:a’J””‘ <\/p>\n
\ufb01a\ufb01a\ufb01t\ufb01e?\n<\/p>\n
3. asa\ufb02zgeg E:-asao\u00e9s 4.1.2ooa.6o:5_o use “zg,’_\u00a7\u00e9&eE>oi3 s;Ei\u00e9\u00a3:-‘\\g-Va\u00e9ari\ufb01 <\/p>\n
Kbaisaowcfsocsgri e9 3e.a”~.3tS war}:-a\u00e9iboci’ esa”\u00bbz;:\u00bbv2\u00bb:=\u00a7d_eg”.:
\naiaoaanmqi esaida wow a31aoE)d3:a’36’+;~o\u00e9,;\u00bb:c_iaigA ea\u00e9srgooda
\nmazes\u00bb mamas?  _  .\n<\/p>\n
4. eaarla.-“sans 336%? a>e;\u00e9s’i’;eoi5::3,_  ”<\/p>\n
 aomdzfgl
\nas-2se’::sacSd3 :-59273633 aarmae? _ = V  ‘<\/p>\n
C361 .\n<\/p>\n
5. wide prism-gas  _’\u20ac3i=3oji as-mks aszurire <a:\u00a7c5
\nE!J\\)$23'eI3Ji\u20ac''\u00a7F'l\u00b0?1'$.''E5'V\u00e9E;!'25i.)~'J_!'_ \u00bb   "  '<\/p>\n
 e;{:\u00e9;s;:';3,.\u00ab g;.\u00a7?a;a.~:\u00a7:5~..\u00ab\u00a7::a;_s aeaomeg sq 338596. same
\n\u00abass ems. sass: gum-.~\u00bb.-+..:a5~s.;;~;se3_g._cs.a'2'<\/p>\n
7. vi’ a Lug v\u00e9i1\u00a7J 4′ of <\/p>\n
~ .  Bi of their claim, the claimants examined PW1
\n documents Exs.P–1 to P-11. The<\/p>\n
  let in any evidence, but the officer of the
\nlV._ir1su1l’ance. company let-in evidence as DW1 and produced
\n“:l:”tt2vol’documents which were marked as Exs.R-2{1) and R–2{2).<\/p>\n
   the basis of the said material on record, the
\nmW.C.Commissioner held that there was a relationship of
\nemployer and employee between the insured and the<\/p>\n
deceased and that the claimants were dependents of the<\/p>\n
22..\n<\/p>\n
Jeri<\/p>\n
the judgment and award impugned in this appeal requires to<\/p>\n
be set aside as against the insurance company.  _ ._\n<\/p>\n
9. Per contra, counsel for the respondent-claimants:while<\/p>\n
supporting the award of the W.C.Commissio*ner <\/p>\n
that the deceased was an employs;-e”‘of the; aridkthat ‘<\/p>\n
under the policy the risk of the   C()V'{3I'(\\:Q”i\u00ab,.,tV3tii\ufb01ii_<\/p>\n
therefore, the W.C.Commissio_ner was “_justili'”i.ed”~.iri’ holding”<\/p>\n
that the claimants had proved:.the’i’r..pAcase”and has rightly
\nfastened the liability or: as the insurer
\nand that the award does  any\u00ab.:in’terference.<\/p>\n
10. lliavingl >i’thett-.,:lcg:unsel for both sides and on
\nperusal “the  record, the only point that arises<\/p>\n
  1\u00b00:fp_’..l\u00a730IisideAr’atio.n\u00abis as to whether award passed by the<\/p>\n
‘ WIS… CorrirI1is’si.oner calls for any interference in this appeal.<\/p>\n
  p. “On”~a_ caj:’ei\u00b0ul scrutiny of material on record, it is not in<\/p>\n
disputethat on 4.1.2006, the deceased Manjunath died in a<\/p>\n
 road “traffic accident which involved tractor–trailer<\/p>\n
” ,Nh.r:A-06-r-9809 KA~06–‘i’-9810 and that the death was on<\/p>\n
 at …account of the road traffic accident. The question that<\/p>\n
however arises for my consideration is, as to whether the<\/p>\n
plea taken by the insured and the insurer that there was no
\nrelationship of employer and employee between the deceased<\/p>\n
and the insured that the liability could not be fastenezilnnder<\/p>\n
the Act on the insurance company is erroneously  i.<\/p>\n
against the appellant herein.  _ _  . V , V\n<\/p>\n
12. In support of their case, the: claimants l’et—iin’–ef..rjxdence\u00ab<\/p>\n
of the father of the deceased.._ En this”–examinati’o’niiniychief’r.L<\/p>\n
has stated that his son was lwolrlxring as._a”‘Acb.oli{\u00a7.: xivith the
\ninsured Jannappa and”‘tl:_1at t.he”tI’a.cto’lr-and trailer belonged<\/p>\n
to the said Jannappa and -on  :da_te accident, while
\nhe wa)s”‘d’ischa;rgin:g “hisvcluties”‘as’ labour and was travelling<\/p>\n
on the “heap of_man1.3re._loaded in the tractor, on account of<\/p>\n
his negIigence.ahe fell’._do12sl–*7r1 from the tractor and succumbed<\/p>\n
 t0injuries;~.. ….. ..The said witness PW} has been
\n‘cross5e.xam_i\u00abned._ by the insurance company. In the<\/p>\n
c:oss–examji–nation, there is no contra–material elicited by<\/p>\n
  zefccept stating that he was not working with the<\/p>\n
it insured: In fact, the plea made out by the insurance<\/p>\n
company is wholly based on the statement of objections \ufb01led<\/p>\n
  the first respondent–insured who had denied that the<\/p>\n
deceased was his employee. Apart from placing reliance on<\/p>\n
the said statement of objections filed by the insured. there is<\/p>\n
Z I. gm”\n<\/p>\n
‘ .\/’<\/p>\n
-10-<\/span><\/p>\n
before the W.C.Commissioner. On a perusal of the schedule<\/p>\n
to the policy, it is noticed that an additional premi.1im:’has<\/p>\n
been collected in respect of the trailer i.e., a sum  _<\/p>\n
the said additional premium is collected   <\/p>\n
that the persons who travel as labgourersj.oliigloadersa<\/p>\n
vehicle are covered under the:policy.”;_I’n vievc\ufb02of additional <\/p>\n
premium collected in respect oillltl:iTe’ir_ailer,’-tlille ‘contention of
\nthe learned counsel for  oompanyl the risk
\nis not covered cannot belaccepted  the policy in
\nquestion is a\u00bb   type of policy
\ncovering   instant case who was
\nan employ   ll lift:     ‘ ‘r’espondent–insured. The
\nCommissioner’  justified in awarding<\/p>\n
compensation in VVlE\u00a7WA~.v0l”~.*Lll1C vehicle being covered by an<\/p>\n
 \u00ab. l_insL1r;i:r1C\u00a2’P91icy.   ….. 14 \u00ab<\/p>\n
1.4′ “‘vAs’lfalrfas’i1’the decision relied upon by the counsel for<\/p>\n
‘V the insurance company is concerned, in the case of United<\/p>\n
 l:’India._.AInslurance Co. Ltd., 1275. Setjerao and others (2007<\/p>\n
 7280), it has been held that when labourers are<\/p>\n
travelling in tractor–trailer, the insurance company has no<\/p>\n
i liability. The question of liability of the insurance company<\/p>\n
would have to be considered on the facts and circumstance<\/p>\n
-11″\n<\/p>\n
of each case having regard to the terms of the policy and the<\/p>\n
premium collected. In the instant case, since it i_s..al.rueady<\/p>\n
held that an additional premium of Rs.375\/–  _<\/p>\n
with regard to the tractor, reliance plac_e~d*~,–o:n..   <\/p>\n
decision cannot be straight away fappli.ed} <\/p>\n
the facts of the present case,; As farlas”anotheijdecisiogn of <\/p>\n
the Apex Court in the case of   Ltd.\n<\/p>\n
V\/s. Brij Mohan  scizii 13734) is
\nconcerned, the liability regard to a
\nlabourer  heap;   in the trailer
\nattached to  the said case, there
\nwas no in  of the trailer, it was
\nheld thatthe  was not liable. The said<\/p>\n
judgment \\liTC”,J_lCi’ also ri,otl’~apply to the facts of the present<\/p>\n
 &_case_”ii11 Vi_ev’.\ufb02_of therealneing insurance coverage of the tractor<\/p>\n
“i:raii.er;,  reliance placed on the judgment of this<\/p>\n
co’u,rt’*ilin  of The Divisional Manager V\/s. Smt.<\/p>\n
‘VAkk\u00a2ivzgci’.g3z.llcznother (ILR 2007 Kar.1382) is also of no<\/p>\n
 V’ ‘assistance of the appellant since the said case is with regard<\/p>\n
‘farrher’s package insurance policy, Whereas in the present<\/p>\n
‘ncase, the policy issued to the insured is miscellaneous and<\/p>\n
A. special type Policy.\n<\/p>\n
\n
-12-<\/span><\/p>\n
15. National Insurance Company Ltd._ V\/s.<\/p>\n
Bramarambike and others [2006 ACJ 6’71) isLa4_4iiCase<\/p>\n
where this court held that the permitted seating{c’aoa’city “i7-qr’ <\/p>\n
the tractor is only that of a driver and no _o’iher:pe’rs.oI1_and””<\/p>\n
hence, no other person’s risk is covered iothei\ufb01thanVfdiiveer;<\/p>\n
The facts of the said case would notivapply pri33sent.:ii~<\/p>\n
case as the deceased fell fromivtfientraileriiwhiichj was covered
\nunder the policy and’    aforesaid
\nreasons, the  the claim
\nH A A V A awarding the<\/p>\n
of the responfi’ent?_c1aiinantsI ‘and.5<\/p>\n
compensation. _.-V\ufb01\ufb02ence. ”there’—- is f;;o’merit in this appeal.<\/p>\n
Accordingly, it is tiisriieisfased. ‘V7\u00a7?ai*ties.A’tobear\ufb02their owncosts.<\/p>\n
The amount in. deposit Abeifore this court is to be<\/p>\n
translrlitted .:W”Qr1irnen’s”~\u20ac*oir1pensation Commssioner.<\/p>\n
Sd\/~=
\nJUDGE<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court United India Insurance Company vs Sri Lakkappa S\/O Jaji Rangappa on 12 November, 2010 Author: B.V.Nagarathna IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 12?” DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2010 BEFORE THE HONBLE MRS. JUSTECE B.v.NAGARA5?fHN;_A-A Of. _ M.F.A.No.3277\/20g9nNC)_- ~ .– .:’jj., O’ BETWEEN: UNITED INDIA INSURANCE coMPA1~\u00ab1y”–_V_ JAYADEVA COMPLEX, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-263366","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nUnited India Insurance Company vs Sri Lakkappa S\/O Jaji Rangappa on 12 November, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-india-insurance-company-vs-sri-lakkappa-so-jaji-rangappa-on-12-november-2010-2\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"United India Insurance Company vs Sri Lakkappa S\/O Jaji Rangappa on 12 November, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-india-insurance-company-vs-sri-lakkappa-so-jaji-rangappa-on-12-november-2010-2\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-11-11T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-09-20T17:12:21+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/united-india-insurance-company-vs-sri-lakkappa-so-jaji-rangappa-on-12-november-2010-2#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/united-india-insurance-company-vs-sri-lakkappa-so-jaji-rangappa-on-12-november-2010-2\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"United India Insurance Company vs Sri Lakkappa S\\\/O Jaji Rangappa on 12 November, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-11-11T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-09-20T17:12:21+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/united-india-insurance-company-vs-sri-lakkappa-so-jaji-rangappa-on-12-november-2010-2\"},\"wordCount\":1792,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/united-india-insurance-company-vs-sri-lakkappa-so-jaji-rangappa-on-12-november-2010-2#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/united-india-insurance-company-vs-sri-lakkappa-so-jaji-rangappa-on-12-november-2010-2\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/united-india-insurance-company-vs-sri-lakkappa-so-jaji-rangappa-on-12-november-2010-2\",\"name\":\"United India Insurance Company vs Sri Lakkappa S\\\/O Jaji Rangappa on 12 November, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-11-11T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-09-20T17:12:21+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/united-india-insurance-company-vs-sri-lakkappa-so-jaji-rangappa-on-12-november-2010-2#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/united-india-insurance-company-vs-sri-lakkappa-so-jaji-rangappa-on-12-november-2010-2\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/united-india-insurance-company-vs-sri-lakkappa-so-jaji-rangappa-on-12-november-2010-2#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"United India Insurance Company vs Sri Lakkappa S\\\/O Jaji Rangappa on 12 November, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"United India Insurance Company vs Sri Lakkappa S\/O Jaji Rangappa on 12 November, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-india-insurance-company-vs-sri-lakkappa-so-jaji-rangappa-on-12-november-2010-2","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"United India Insurance Company vs Sri Lakkappa S\/O Jaji Rangappa on 12 November, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-india-insurance-company-vs-sri-lakkappa-so-jaji-rangappa-on-12-november-2010-2","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-11-11T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-09-20T17:12:21+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-india-insurance-company-vs-sri-lakkappa-so-jaji-rangappa-on-12-november-2010-2#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-india-insurance-company-vs-sri-lakkappa-so-jaji-rangappa-on-12-november-2010-2"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"United India Insurance Company vs Sri Lakkappa S\/O Jaji Rangappa on 12 November, 2010","datePublished":"2010-11-11T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-09-20T17:12:21+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-india-insurance-company-vs-sri-lakkappa-so-jaji-rangappa-on-12-november-2010-2"},"wordCount":1792,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-india-insurance-company-vs-sri-lakkappa-so-jaji-rangappa-on-12-november-2010-2#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-india-insurance-company-vs-sri-lakkappa-so-jaji-rangappa-on-12-november-2010-2","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-india-insurance-company-vs-sri-lakkappa-so-jaji-rangappa-on-12-november-2010-2","name":"United India Insurance Company vs Sri Lakkappa S\/O Jaji Rangappa on 12 November, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-11-11T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-09-20T17:12:21+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-india-insurance-company-vs-sri-lakkappa-so-jaji-rangappa-on-12-november-2010-2#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-india-insurance-company-vs-sri-lakkappa-so-jaji-rangappa-on-12-november-2010-2"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-india-insurance-company-vs-sri-lakkappa-so-jaji-rangappa-on-12-november-2010-2#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"United India Insurance Company vs Sri Lakkappa S\/O Jaji Rangappa on 12 November, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/263366","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=263366"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/263366\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=263366"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=263366"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=263366"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}