Disposed

United India Insaurance Co.Ltd., v. Smt. G.Padmamma and 7OTHERS.

Telangana HC7 Oct 2020CMA/1124/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this civil miscellaneous appeal, the High Court disposed of the matter in terms of a settlement award passed by a Lok Adalat, agreeing to a reduced compensation amount and allowing a refund to the appellant insurance company.

What did the court decide?

Appeal disposed of in terms of the Lok Adalat award authorizing a refund of Rs. 25,000 to the appellant.

United India Insaurance Co.Ltd., Vs Smt… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE^{HIGH COURTFOR THE STATEOF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶2

WEDNESDAY, ''-_^{THE SEVENTH DAY OF OCTOBER} TWO THOUSAND^ANDTWENTY

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE^{JUSTICEG' SRI DEVI}

¶5

CIVIL MISCE^{LLANEO US APPEAL NO:11'24 oF 2004}

¶6

Appeal^{UnderSection 30 of Workmen's CompensationAct againstthe Orderin} W.C. No.^{3 of 2003 dated13-08-2003on the file of the Commissionerfor Workmen's} Compensation^{and AssistantCommissionerof Labour lll at' TAnjaiaharmia} Sankshema^{Bhavan,R'T'C' Cross Roads'Hyderabad}

¶7

Between:

¶8

United^{rndia rnsau,?nE"-ct:g3!il#fi}ifl,..fi?!""Sfiffii} il;J'#"",tJ313!li',L"?n"i Basheerbagh^{Cross Roaos} oP)

¶9

..Appellant

¶10

AND 1 2 smtGPadmamma,wo-sri3f kum G. Vasantha,^{D/o Lat'} b'J?J['il""i,:,9.b''^f i?':i:r:'"I:ttli;i J M'l&!;, o^{Krishnaiah, s/o Late Sri Gosula Malleshy @ Mallaiah'occStudent'} Ivlinor.

¶11

4 5 ,+J,,llilfi tv",#"3tshu.u;lP:il-",ft4''H:ilffi :;:""'

¶12

6 7 EilLennn:i,r5?":ir,3'B?lYru,u,.ntgeg)"^o::'icurtureR/o B uft#'ffi^.;lHsr#,#ffi (1"t ResPonden ",,:#liHffi^{ii)fl ?,",i,;l}

¶13

"Respondents

¶14

Counsel^{for the Appellant:SRI SOMANCHI VENKATESWARLU}

¶15

Counsel^{for the Respondents:SRICHANDRASEKHAR REDDY GOPIREDDY} The Court^{madethe following: JUDGMENT}

¶16

HON'BLE JUSTICE^{G. SRI DEVI}

¶17

¶18

JUDGMENT:

¶19

Pursuant to a settlement^{arrivedat betweenthe parties, the Lok} Adalat, Hyderabad,^{passedthe following award on 23.07} '2014:

¶20

Smt.R.Sandhya,^{Manager,United India Insurance Company} Limited and Sri J.Satyanarayana^{Rao, learnedcounsel for} respondents/applicants, are^{present. The matterhas been} settled amicably between^{the parties.}

¶21

The respondents/applicants^{are agreed to receivereduced} compensation amount of^{Rs.3,12,391/- against the awarded} amount of Rs.3,37,391/-'^{Thus, the appellant-Insurance} Company is entitled to^{get refund of Rs.25,000/-along with} accrued interest thereon.

¶22

It is also brought to the notice^{of the Lok Adalath that the P} respondent died during^{pendency of the appeal, the death} certificate issued by Grampanchayat,^{Amangalhas been filed} along with memo. The^{legal heirsarealreadyon record'}

¶23

The respondents/applicants^{are permitted to withdraw the entire} amount, as per the apportionment^{made by the Tribunal.}

¶24

The parties are informed that^{the Courtfee, if any, paidby any} of them shall be refunded.

¶25

No orders as to the costs of appeal.

¶26

J,.,,,

¶27

¶28

In view of the award dated 23.07.2014, passed by the Lok Adalat, Hyderabad, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is

¶29

disposed of in terms of the award.

¶30

Consequently, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall

¶31

stand closed.

¶32

SD/. B.S.^CHIRANJEEVI JOINT R.EGISTRAR tEcrro$Srrrcen

¶33

/ffRUE coPY/'

¶34

to'.,. ,n" commissioner for workmen,s compensation and Assistant commissioner of

¶35

Sanftf'ema^{Bhavan'R T'C' Cross Roads'}

¶36

Labour lll^{at, T' Anialh} 'itit HYderabad.^{(With records)'}

¶37

Z. Oine CC^{to Sri Somanchi Venkateswarlu' Advocate[OPU-C].} --

¶38

One CC^{to Sri JuwadisatyanarayanaRao' Advocate [OPUC]}

¶39

Two CD CoPies

¶40

(ntong with a copy^{of Lok Adalat Award dated 23 07'2014)}

HIGH COURT

GSDJ

DATED:07/10/2020

JUDGMENT

CMA.No.1 124 ot 2004

1 H E r4
k
c
U
29 JAN2021
'*

¶49

DISPOSING OF THE C.M.A, IN TERMS OF LOK ADALAT

a(dJ {r.lk

V "q

(

BEFORE THE LOK ADALAT

¶54

HEtD AT HYDERAEAD

¶55

IOrgonized^{by High Courl Legol Services Commitlee} High Courl of Judicolure ol Hyderobod for the Slole of Ielongono ond lhe^{Slole of AndhroProdesh} Under Seclion l9 of lfre Legol Servi(les^{AuihoritlesAc1.l9B/(CenlrolAcl)l}

¶56

/MACMA.No.1124 ot 2OO4

¶57

(BeloIe Hon'l'le High Court)

¶58

(Agoinst order in w.c.No.3/ 2oo3 on lhe file ol the commissioner^{lor workmen compensolion/} Deputy Commissioner for tobour/ Assislonl^{Commissionerol [obour'lll,Hydetobod)}

¶59

Th,: United lndio lnsuronce ComPonY Lir,rited, rep. by i1s Regionol^Monoger. Bcrsheerbogh Cross^Roods, Bosheerbogh, Hyderobod. I Sn''1.G.Podmommo.^{w/o.Lote Sri Gosulo} Mcrllesh @ Molloioh, 2 Kum.G.Vosontho, D/o.Loie Gouslo M,rllesh 3 Sri G.Krishnoioh, S/o.Lote^{Gosulo Mollesh,} 4 Kum.G.Sriloiho, D/o.Lote^{Gosulo mollesh,} 5 Kum.G.Penlommo,^{D/o'LoieGosulo} Mirllesh. 6 Snrt.G.Anjommo,^{w/o'G Porvotholu'} 7 Sri G.Porvolholu, S/o.Lote^Molloioh. All ore R./o.Jongoreddypolly^(v). Ari.rongol Mondol, Mohoboobnogor Di,lticl

¶60

Appellonl/ Opposile Porty No.2

¶61

Respondenls/ oppliconls

¶62

Respondents/ Opposite B M,rhommed^{AbdulKhodeer. S/o.no1} Porly No.l kncwn, oged moior. Occ:Business, R I o ) 6'2'7 20 I 1, Molokpet.^{Hyder obocl.}

¶63

[No.^{of proceedings of lhe High CourtLegolServicesCommiltee:ORDER} Roc.No.¹ / I 5/HCtSC/20^{1 4 D|.21-7 -2014l} :: Presenl ::

¶64

Nome of IChoirmon : Hon'ble Sri Justice^C.V.Romulu,

¶65

Judge, High Courl^{of A.P' (Retd.).}

¶66

Nome of Members : (1) Smt.G.Nivedito,

¶67

Advocore. Bor Associolion, Hyderobod.

¶68

(2) Sri P.Rom Noroyon ChettY, Socicl worker, HYderobod.

¶69

ATtrARD

¶70

The dispute between^{the portieshoving been referred for delerminot'bn} to the LOK ADALAT^{ond the porties hovingcompromised the cose / motter, the} following Aword^{is possed in terms of the seitlement:}

¶71

l. Smt.R.Sondhyo,^{Monoger,Linited lndio lnsuronce ComponyLimiled} ond Sri J.Sotyonoroyono^{Roo, leorned counsel for respondents/} oppliconls, ore^{present.The motterhos been setlled omicobl/} between^the Porties.

¶72

The respondents/^{opplir:crnts orer ogreed loreceive redLrced} compensotion^{omountof F': 3,12'391/-ogoinsl lhe owclrded omounl}

lA^(,'

\ ,1 ,-

(

of Rs.3,3/.391/-. Ihus, lhe oppellont-lnsuronce Compony is 6ntilled lo gel refund of Rs.25,000/- olong with occrued interest thereon.

¶77

l't is olso broughl lo the notice of lhe Lok-Adoloth lhot lhe Zrh respondenl died during pendency of the oppeol, the deoth certificote issued by Gromponchoyot, Amongol hos been filed olong with memo. The legol heirs ore olreody on record.

¶78

The respondents/ oppliconts ore permitted to withdrow ihe enlire omounl, os per the opporiionment mode by lhe Tribunol.

¶79

The^porties ore informed thot the court fee, if ony, poid by ony of lhem sholl be relunded.

¶80

No orders os 1o the cosls of oppeol.

¶81

:;'r Ltnited lndia lnsurance c0'^Ltd' ",,," r:J---*

¶82

Respondenl/ opplicont No.l

¶83

Appello

¶84

(_1aSfuo qE Respondenl/ oppliconl No.2 )

¶85

@-[c-:'ist^uotl'

¶86

Respondent/ oppliconl No.3

¶87

6 sott-.,. tho

¶88

Respondent/ oppliconl No.4

¶89

a *urAapbl

¶90

Respondent/ opplicont No.5

¶91

Res ndenl/ op cont No ffl^r'nA'</sup>

¶92

Counsel for Appellont/ c I espon nfsT
Opposite Porty No.2 oppliconts
G rr,urJ)t--,. I
Ch n Membqr. Member
Dote: |] -) ' -'Lol,rt-r

¶93

(Seol of the Committee)

¶94

)

United India Insaurance Co.Ltd., v. Smt. G.Padmamma and 7OTHERS.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

United India Insaurance Co.Ltd., v. Smt. G.Padmamma and 7OTHERS.

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

Pratapa Ramakrishna Vs Rajendra Sharma Madhu and 5 others

Sayyeda Ayesha Vs Smt. Putta Shylaja (Shailaja)

Bhukya , Dharavath Pooja and 5 Others Vs B.S.S. Krishnakanth Naik

Chilamcharla Prabhakar Vs Chilamancharla Ravindranath Tagore and 12 others

Syed Aleem Vs Syed Ismail and Anr.

Syed Iliaz, Nizamabad. Vs Mohd. Osman, Nizamabad and Another