Disposed

Smt. Paramma v. Sri Raviprakash

Karnataka HC2 Feb 2024MFA/3935/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Claimants' appeal seeking enhancement of employees compensation was settled before Lok Adalat for an additional lump-sum of Rs. 42,000 payable by the insurer over the Tribunal award, with interest on default.

What did the court decide?

Additional Rs. 42,000 compensation payable by insurer over Tribunal award, depositable within six weeks else with 9% p.a. interest; released proportionately to claimants.

Smt. Paramma Vs Sri Raviprakash — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶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 02^ND DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024

¶5

CONCILIATORS PRESENT:

¶6

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE T.G. SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA

¶7

¶8

SMT. PARINEETA S. CHANAL, MEMBER

¶9

M.F.A.No. 3935/2021 (ECA) (Lok Adalat No. 2304/2023)

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

Smt. Paramma W/o Late Lingappa, Aged about 42 years.

¶12

Smt. Ashwini D/o Late Lingappa, Aged about 27 years.

¶13

Smt. Kavya D/o Late Lingappa, Aged about 25 years.

¶14

Malleshi S/o Late Lingappa, Aged about 23 years.

¶15

All are residing of Shivaganga Village, Holalkere Taluk, Now they residing at Herebennur Village,

¶16

¶17

Chikkabennur Post, Chitradurga Taluk and District-577 501. ...APPELLANTS

¶18

(By Sri. T.C. Shivakumarappa, Advocate)

¶19

AND:

¶20

Sri. Raviprakash Major, Owner of Tanker Lorry bearing No.KA-16/C-4811, Dealer, BPCL Ltd., No.509, Sy. No.68/6, NH-13, Shivaganga at Post, Holalkere Taluk, Chitradurga District-577 526.

¶21

The Branch Manager, New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Branch Office, B.D. Road, Opposite Petrol Bunk, Chitradurga – 577 501. …RESPONDENTS

¶22

(By Sri. Ashok N. Patil, Advocate for R-2, Notice to R-1 – d/w v.c.o. dated 27.11.2023)

¶23

MFA FILED U/S 30 (1) OF EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 10.10.2018 PASSED IN E.C.A. NO. 56/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM AND ADDL. MACT-III, CHITRADURGA, 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

¶26

CONCILIATION ORDER

¶27

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

¶28

After prolonged negotiations, the matter is settled amicably. 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 respondent - Insurance Company has agreed to pay a lump-sum of Rs. 42,000/- (Rupees Forty Two Thousand only) in addition to what has been awarded by the Tribunal, in full and final settlement of the claim. Hence, the Joint Memo is accepted.

¶29

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.

¶30

The entire enhanced compensation amount shall be released in favour of

¶31

the appellants / claimants proportionately, on proper identification.

¶32

¶33

This Miscellaneous First Appeal stands disposed of in terms of the Joint

¶34

memo. The Judgment and Award of the Tribunal shall stand modified accordingly. Draw up the Award accordingly.

¶35

Sd/JUDGE

¶36

Sd/MEMBER

¶37

Rbv

Smt. Paramma v. Sri Raviprakash

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Paramma v. Sri Raviprakash

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Karnataka State Road, Vs D.L. Huchegowda

The Divisional Controller Vs Sri Shivashankar K T

Manikantan Vs the Divisional Controller

Eranna Vs Narasimhamurthy C M

N. Thippeswamy Vs Kesani Murali Naidu

Smt. Syamala @ Shamala Vs New India Assurance Company Ltd.