Allowed

Smt H Anitha v. Smt B M Radhamma

Karnataka HC5 Jun 2023MFA/6299/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a Motor Vehicles Miscellaneous First Appeal, the High Court Lok Adalat conciliated the matter between appellants/claimants and the respondent insurance company. Following negotiations, a settlement was reached for an additional lump-sum payment of Rs. 8,00,000.

What did the court decide?

Respondent Insurance Company agreed to pay an additional lump sum of Rs. 8,00,000 in full and final settlement, payable within six weeks.

Smt H Anitha Vs Smt B M Radhamma — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

HIGH COURT LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE, BENGALURU BEFORE THE LOK ADALAT

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF JUNE 2023

¶5

CONCILIATORS PRESENT:

¶6

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE C.M.JOSHI AND

¶7

MS. M.R. RASHMI, MEMBER

¶8

M.F.A.No.6299/2022 (MV) (Lok Adalat No.1211/2023)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

Smt. H. Anitha W/o Late S. Naresh, Aged about 27 years.

¶11

Deepthi M.N. D/o Late S. Naresh, Aged about 5 years.

¶12

Abhinandan N. D/o Late S. Naresh, Aged about 3 years.

¶13

Smt. Venkatamma W/o Late Seenappa, Major.

¶14

Appellants No.2 & 3 are minors, Hence represented by mother/ Natural guardian.

¶15

All are residing at Marandahalli, Mulbagal Taluk, Kolar District.

¶16

...APPELLANTS

¶17

(BY SRI. K.V. NAIK, ADVOCATE)

¶18

¶19

AND:

¶20

Smt. B.M. Radhamma W/o M. Manjunatha, Major, 2^nd Cross, No.36, S.G. Layout, Kolar – 563 101, (Owner of Car bearing No. KA-07/M-6216).

¶21

The Manager, M/s. ICICI Lombard General Ins. Co., The Estate Building, 9^th Floor, Dickenson Road, M.G. Road, Bengaluru-560 001. (Policy No. 3001/MI-08533978/ 00/000 valid from 21.01.2020 to 19.01.2021). …RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SRI. B. PRADEEP, ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

¶23

THIS MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 27.04.2022 PASSED IN MVC NO.3336/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE XXI ADDL. JUDGE OF SMALL CAUSES COURT AND ACMM AND MEMBER, MACT, BENGALURU (SCCH-23), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶24

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR CONCILIATION BEFORE LOK ADALAT, THE FOLLOWING CONCILIATION ORDER IS PASSED.

¶25

CONCILIATION ORDER

¶26

The learned Counsel appearing for the Appellants - Claimants is present.

¶27

The learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent – Insurance Company along with its representative are present.

¶28

¶29

After prolonged negotiations, the matter is settled. A joint memo signed by the learned advocate appearing for the appellants/claimants (being authorized by the appellants/claimants to sign) and the learned advocate appearing for the respondent - Insurance Company and its authorized officer is filed. The appellants-claimants have agreed to receive and the respondentInsurance Company has agreed to pay a lump-sum of Rs.8,00,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs only), in addition to what has been awarded by the claims tribunal, in full and final settlement of the claim. We are satisfied that the settlement is just, proper and reasonable.

¶30

The Respondent - Insurance Company has agreed to deposit the said amount before the Tribunal within six weeks from the date of preparation of award, failing which the said amount shall carry interest at the rate of 9% P.A. from the date of default, till the date of deposit.

¶31

The apportionment, deposit and release of the enhanced compensation

¶32

amount shall be made in terms of the Judgment and Award passed by the Claims Tribunal.

¶33

¶34

This Miscellaneous First Appeal stands disposed of in terms of the Joint memo. The Judgment of the Tribunal shall stands modified accordingly. Draw up the Award accordingly.

¶35

Sd/JUDGE

¶36

Sd/MEMBER

¶37

Rbv

Smt H Anitha v. Smt B M Radhamma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt H Anitha v. Smt B M Radhamma

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

Sri Rajegowda Vs Shivashankar

Sri. Siddappa Vs Sri. Kantharaj

Sri R. Lakshmanappa Vs Sri Harsha B

Smt Varalakshmi T K Vs Sri Ramakrishna

Gangadharaiah. S. N. Vs Jagadish

Murthy K K Vs Lakshmi M.