Dismissed

M/S Icici Lombard General v. Rajalakshmi

Madras HC5 Feb 2015CMA/2653/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Lok Adalat settled a civil miscellaneous appeal filed by an insurance company against a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal award. The parties reached a compromise reducing the award amount. The tribunal directed issuance of cheques based on the settlement, disposed of the appeal, and allowed refund of court fees.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed; parties to withdraw cheque for Rs.5,25,000; court fee refunded to appellant.

M/S Icici Lombard General Vs Rajalakshmi — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

HIGH COURT LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE, CHENNAI

¶2

Lok Adalat-II organised by the High Court Legal Services Committee

¶3

Thursday, the 05^th day of February, 2015

¶4

LOK ADALAT AWARD

¶5

(Chapter VI and u/s 21 of Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987) Presided over by

¶6

The Hon'ble Mr.JUSTICE T.N.VALLINAYAGAM(Retd.) and

¶7

Members

¶8

Mr. J.A.Rukmagngathan Mr. M.Dhamodharan C.M.A.No.2653 of 2012 (Appeal against the award and decree passed on 31.01.2012 in M.C.O.P.No.2075 of 2009 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (Principal District Court) Cuddalore). M/s.ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co.Ltd., Zenith House, Keshavrao Khade Marg, Mahalakshmi, Mumbai – 400 034. ... Appellant/2nd Respondent Vs. 1.Rajalakshmi 2.Banupriya 3.Murugan 4.Natarajan ...Respondents 1 to 4/Petitioners 1 to 4 5.Dr.Anbu Paul (R-5 was set ex parte before the lower court) ... 5th Respondent/Respondent

¶9

On representation of the learned counsel for the claimants, this case is taken up for settlement before the Lok Adalat. Both the parties are present. The learned counsel for the appellant, Ms.Sreevidhya and the learned counsel for the second respondents 1 to 4, Mr.Arunachalam are present. After mutual discussion, negotiation, mediation and conciliation between both parties, they arrived at a compromise to settle the matter as follows:

¶10

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶11

TERMS OF SETTLEMENT

¶12

Both the parties and their respective counsel are present.

¶13

2.The appellant/Insurance Company has preferred the present appeal aggrieved against the award of Rs.5,65,000/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit as compensation. It is represented by the learned counsel for the Insurance Company that entire award amount with interest has been deposited in the tribunal and 50% of the amount has also been withdrawn by the respondents 1 to 4/claimants.

¶14

After frank and open negotiation, it is agreed by both the parties to settle the dispute for a sum of Rs.5,25,000/(Rupees Five Lakhs and Twenty Five Thousands Only) in full quit.

¶15

4.The claimants/respondents 1 to 4 are permitted to withdraw the balance of the modified award amount in the same ratio as apportioned by the tribunal without filing any formal petition. After satisfaction of the decree, the appellant/Insurance Company is permitted to withdraw the surplus amount. Award is passed accordingly.

¶16

The Tribunal is directed to issue the cheques to the parties concerned on proper identification in accordance with the terms of the award, without insisting on any formal permission petition. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is disposed of accordingly. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed, if any.

¶17

Sd/-

¶18

M/s.ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co.Ltd., Zenith House, Keshavrao Khade Marg, Sd/Mahalakshmi, Mumbai – 400 034 Counsel for the Appellant

Sd/Rajalakshmi

Sd/Banupriya

Sd/Murugan

Sd/Sd/Natarajan Counsel for the Respondents

¶23

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶24

This Lok Adalat award is passed in terms of the above settlement.

¶25

The Court fee paid shall be refunded to the appellant in the manner provided under Section 69-A of the Tamil Nadu Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1955 and the Court Fees Act, 1870 as provided for under sub Sec.1 of Section 21 r/w 25 of LSA Act 1987 as amended in 1994.

¶26

Sd/-
Judge
Sd/- Sd/-
Member Member
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(J)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
gv
To:
The parties/Advocate concerned
Copy to:
1. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal
(Principal District Court) Cuddalore.
2. The Secretary,
High Court Legal Services Committee,
Chennai.
3. The Section Officer,
V.R.Section,
High Court, Madras.
4. The Section Officer,
Lok Adalat Section,
High Court, Madras.
+2 Copies
C.M.A.No.2653 of 2012

¶27

AD(CO) CA(17/11/2015)

¶28

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

M/S Icici Lombard General v. Rajalakshmi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Icici Lombard General v. Rajalakshmi

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

V.Vijayakumar Vs Mr.S.Mohammed Kasim

Nandagopal Vs Sulochanammal

Nandagopal Vs Sadhana

The Managing Director Vs Shenbagavalli

Tamilnadu State Transport Vs the Presiding Officer

M.Dinesh Kumar Vs the Registrar