Allowed

Ramprasad @ Ramu v. Ganesh Sahu and Ors.

Chhattisgarh HC12 Nov 2016MAC/341/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a miscellaneous appeal adjudicated by the High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur functioning as a National Lok Adalat. The court upheld an amicable settlement between the appellant and respondents to compromise the dispute.

What did the court decide?

Respondent insurance company ordered to pay Rs. 4,50,000 by way of compensation in addition to the amount awarded by the Tribunal, with interest at 12% per annum.

Ramprasad @ Ramu Vs Ganesh Sahu and Ors. — Bail and Remand | Chhattisgarh HC (2016)

¶1

1':^ jp:^

¶2

OIvision^Bench c^

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶4

MISC. APPEAL fd N0.^{->^t^} /2012

¶5

MISC. APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF^THEMOTOR VEHICLE ACT, 1988

¶6

APPELLANT *^^-Ramprasad @Ramu, S/o Nandkumar f^~ p/ 1 1 ) ^- Vishkarma ,aged about 20 years R/o - B.No........2."l-'-|-^";^"^;^yitj/ ViUage Rashani , P.S. Aaraiig Pt&stste^ by Shri. I..7..v—fr- i nistript District - - Raipur Rflil (C.G.) (?i5^A-"""'"T''<"v"" VERSUS

VERSUS

RESPONDENTS Driver

Qwner 2.
In'surer

Ganesh Sahu S/o Netramsahu aged about 32 years, R/0 VUlage Ghodhela Post Nikum chouk P.S Arjunda,DistrictDurg(C.G.)(VehicleMatador No-C.G. 04-ZB-0190 OFDriver)

¶11

Vinay Kumar Bagadi 8/6 Gopikishan Bagdi, aged about 55 years,^{R/oVillageRamadhinmar^} , Rajnangaon Tahsil SE District - Raipur (C.G.)(Vehicale Matador NoC.G.04-ZB-0190 OF Owner.

¶12

The new Indialnsurance Company Liraited,ThroughDivisionalMan.ager, Divisional Office Kachehari Chouk Jel Road Raipur.DistrictRaipur. (C.G.)(Vehicle Matador No C.G. 04ZB-0190 OF Insurance Company.

¶13

CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT. BILASPUR

¶14

NATIONAL LOK ADALAT

¶15

Judge - Lok Adalat: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Goutam Bhaduri Member - Lok Adalat: Mr. Y.C. Sharma, Advocate

¶16

IVI.A.(ClNo.341of2012

Ramprasad @ Ramu

-— Appellant

Versus

Ganesh Sahu & Ors.

——Respondents

ForAppellant

For RespondenVlnsurance Co.

¶24

Mr. A.L.Singroul, Advocate ^if'

¶25

Mr.Ariand Kumar Gupta, Advocate.

¶26

ORDER

¶27

(Passed on 12th November, 2016)

¶28

••^LS.^^^The contesting parties to this appeal have amicably settled/compromised the dispute, which is subject matter of this appeal, voluntarily. We have also found that the terms and conditions of compromise/settlement arrived at between the contesting parties are just, proper and legal. There is no legal impediment tp compromise and hence are acceptable. We accordingly accept the compromise/settlement, proposed by the parties and order that the respondenVinsurance company shall pay Rs. 4,50,000/- by way of compensation in addition to the amount awarded by the learned Tribunal to the appellant within 60 days from today, otherwise interest @ 12% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition, shall also be payable till its realization.

¶29

Sd/-

¶30

Sd/-

¶31

(Gout^'nBhaduri^ Judge-LokAdalat High Court of Chhattisgarh Bilaspur

¶32

(Y.C.Sharma) Member - Lok Adalat High Court of Chhattisgarh Bilaspur

¶33

ashok

Ramprasad @ Ramu v. Ganesh Sahu and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramprasad @ Ramu v. Ganesh Sahu and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Seema Jaiswal Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Shiv Chandrakar Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

M.d.patele Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Anarkali Paikara and Ors. Vs Dohai Lal and Ors.

Dr.E.C.Shekhar Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Triloki Nath Singh Vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors.