Disposed

Tarun Patel v. Sanjay Karmakar And Ors.

Chhattisgarh HC11 Feb 2017MAC/231/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The National Lokadalat of the Chhattisgarh High Court, Bilaspur, disposed of an appeal for enhanced compensation in a motor accident case. Upon finding that the parties had amicably settled the dispute and the terms were just and proper, the court upheld the settlement. It ordered the respondent insurer to pay an additional sum to the appellant.

What did the court decide?

Respondent/Insurance Company ordered to pay appellant an additional sum of Rs. 3,00,000 by way of compensation within 60 days.

Tarun Patel Vs Sanjay Karmakar And Ors. — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Chhattisgarh HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURTOF CHHATTISGARH AT

¶2

BILASPUR

¶3

M. A. (C) No. 2^/ of 2015

APPELLANT

(CLAIMANT)

..^ < .%p'

Tarun Patel son of Punit Ram Patel, aged about 26 years, R/o. Village Utekel, P.S. Sankara, District y-'Mahasamund (C.G.), working place Mahamaya Para Arang, P.S. Arang, District Raipur (C.G.),

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

RESPONDENTS :1.

¶10

Sanjay Karmakar son of R. Karmakar, aged about 28 years, R/o. Khodikasuli, P.S. Gorbenna, District Medinapur (West Bengal) (Driver)

¶11

¶12

Gopal Bhattacharyaji son of Rash Bihari Bhattacharyaji, r/o. Village Ganak Bandhi, Post Amlagoda, P.S. i^orbenna, District Medinapur (West Bengal) (Owner)

¶13

¶14

Bajaj Aliyanze General Insurance Company Limited, Through : The Divisional Manager, Division Office, Mobile Mahal, Vidhan Sabha Road, Pandari, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.), (Insurer),

¶15

MEMO OF APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLE ACT 1988 FOR ENHANCEMENT

¶16

NATIONAL LOKADALAT

¶17

Chhattisgarh High Court Campus. Bilaspur

¶18

IVIA(C) No. 231 of 2015

APPELLANT(S)

:- Tarun Patel

VERSUS

RESPONDENT :- Sanjay Karmakar & Ors.

¶23

Appellant(s) with

¶24

:- Shri R. Pradhan, Advocate

¶25

Respondent(s) with Shri :- Shri Sachin Singh Rajput, Advocate

¶26

AWARD

¶27

(Passed on 11 th February, 2017)

¶28

After due consideration, the delay occurred in preferring the instant appeal is condoned.

¶29

The contesting parties to this appeal have amicably settled/compromised the dispute, which is subject matter ofthis appeal, voluntarily. We have also found that terms and conditions of compromise/ settlement, arrived at between the contesting parties ye just, proper and legal and hence are acceptable, we accordingly accept the compromise/settlement, proposed by the pari:ies and order that the respondent/ Insurance Company shall pay to the appellant(s) an additional sum of Rs. 3,00,000 /-(Rupees three lakhs) by way of compensation, within 60 dsys from today othemise, interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim.petition shall also be payable till realization of the additional amount of compensation. 50% of the enhanced amount shall be kept in fixed deposit in a nationalized bank for a period of one year and rest of the amount shall be paid to the appellants as per norms ofthe Claims Tribunal.

¶30

A.copy of the docket (compromise arrived at between the parties) be sent to the Claims Tribunal along with its record, if any and a copy of the award passed today, forthwith.

¶31

Sd/(Anil Kur^ai- Shykla) Judge- LokAdalat yHigh Court of Chhattisgarh Bilaspur

¶32

Sd/(Dr. N. K. Shukla)

¶33

Member-LokAdalat High Court of Chhattisgarh Bilaspur

Tarun Patel v. Sanjay Karmakar And Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tarun Patel v. Sanjay Karmakar And Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Umar Lal Gupta Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Daneshwar Prasad Vs Dharamlaldead Through Lrs. Ramcharan

Hiran Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Shishupal Ratade Vs Balkishan Sahu

Smt. Vidya Soni Vs Ramesh Kumar Sahu And Ors.

Smt. Kavita Banjare And Ors. Vs Paramjeet Singh And Ors.