Disposed

Syed Aleem v. Syed Ismail and Anr.

Telangana HC7 Oct 2020CMA/822/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a Civil Miscellaneous Appeal regarding a workmen compensation dispute. The appeal was decided without interference as it had been settled amicably by a Lok Adalat, resulting in enhanced compensation payable by the respondent insurer.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was disposed of in terms of the Lok Adalat award ordering the respondent to pay enhanced compensation of Rs. 1,03,000 with interest.

Syed Aleem Vs Syed Ismail and Anr. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2020)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

WEDNESDAY,THE SEVENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE G SRI DEVI

¶5

CIVIL MI SCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 822 OF 2005

¶6

Appeal filed Under Section 30 of W.C Act against the Order dated 24.12.2003 made in W.C.No.209 ol 2002 on the file of the Commissioner for Workmen Compensation Act (ACL), Nizamabad.

¶7

Between:

¶8

Syed Aleem, S/o.Syed Sharthiuddin^{Driver R/o.Navior"'*,ii[FB?tLANT/cLArMANr}

¶9

AND

¶10

lsvedlsmails/o.SvedAnwerOcc:OwnerR/o.NavipetaNizamabadDist' 2. The Branch Manager,^{National lnsuranceCo, Ltd'. NizamabadNizamabad} District

¶11

'..RESP.NDENTS/RESP.NDENTS

¶12

Counsel for the^{Appellant: SRl. K SARALAMAHENDER REDDY}

¶13

Counsel for^{the Respondent No'2 : SRIG'VISHWESHWAR REDDY}

¶14

The Court^{madethe following:ORDER}

¶15

HON'BLE^{JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI}

¶16

f 0

¶17

JUDGMENT:

¶18

Pursuant to^{a settlement arrivedat between the parties' the Lok} Adalat, Hyderabad,^{passedthe followingawardon l4'L2'2019:}

¶19

The appellant^{herein and Sri Azar SravanKumarand Sri Azar} Kishan Rao,^{Advocates for the appeilant and the respondent} No.1 through Ms'Sujatha^{K.Kumar,Manager, National} Insurance Company^{Ltd., and theircounsel are present'The} matter has been settled^{amicablybetween the parties.}

¶20

That the respondent/respondent^{No.1 agreed to pay enhanced} compensatiolt of Rs.1,03,000/-^{(RupeesOne Lakh three} thousand only) against the awarded amount of^Rs.92,379/-.

¶21

That the respondent/insurance company is to deposit an amount of Rs.1,03,000/- (Rupees One Lakh three thousand only) within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this award. In the event of default, the agreed amount shall carry interest at 6% per annum from the date of default.

¶22

The appellant/claimant is permitted to withdraw the entire amount as and when deposited by the insurance company.

¶23

The parties are informed that the Court fee, if any, paid by any of them shall be refunded.

¶24

No orders as to the costs of appeal.

¶25

¶26

In view of rhe award dated 14.12.2019, passed by the Lok Adalat, Hyderabad, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal IS

¶27

disposed of in terms of the award.

¶28

Consequently, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall

¶29

stand closed.

¶30

SD/-K.GANGADHAR RA JOINT GI

//TRUE COPY//

SECTI OFFICER

To,

1 The Commissioner for Workmen Compensation Act (ACL), Nizamabad (With Records),

¶35

2 The Secretary, Legal Services Committee, High Court for the State of Telangana J One CC to Sri K.Sarala Mahender Reddy,Advocate (OPUC) 4 One CC to Sri G.Vishweshwar Reddy ,Advocate^(OPUC) Two CD Copies

¶36

(Along with a copy of Lok Adalat Award dated 14.12.2019)

HIGH COURT

GSD,J

DATED:0711012020

ORDER

C.M.A.No.822 of 2005

1 H€ s L1 16:
s
3 J 21oCI2U0
t toz
*{+
D PA c PgO

¶44

Disposing of the C.M.A In terms of Lok Adalat Award, Without costs.

rrky'
rLll
0 t!
i1

BEFORE THE LOK ADALAT

¶49

\r r-

¶50

(orsanized by Hish .o,Tr$:f?fl:Ji:l*tf,?ee Hisn co,,t of J udicature at Hvderabad for the state oF ierangjnai,_, (Under section r9 of ihe r_egat S;rvic"ei'au,iori,,", Act 1987 (Centra I Act)

¶51

t#filurt

¶52

s ^ or ?iolca?l iuol ( Bero re n ".,u" u vo u.u ou o l Against order in w.c No'209/io0r;; Labour at Nizamabad)i.,"'il" "i,n" Depurv commissioner or

¶53

A ppella nt/petitioner Syed Aleem s/ o Syed Sharfuddin, aged 41 years, occu ;^Driver of Jeep R/o I Navipet village and mandal, Dist. Nizamabad Respondent No.1^l" i National I nsurance company Ltd., represented by its Branch Manager, ) Branch Office: Nizamabad Respondent No., t Syed Ismail, s/o Syed Anwar, aged, maJor, occu: owner of the Jeep No.MZV-1540 R/o Navipet,,rillage and mandal, Dist.. Nizamabad

¶54

NO. OF PROCEEDINGS OF THE HIGH COURT LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE: oRDER ROC. NO, 151 /HCLSC/2)L? DT. 1 1-12_2019

Present:

Name of Chairman

Name of Members

SERV/ c
O
,rrcH COURT
*
i-o-l< t olulr
,ii!(,!'

¶59

: Hon'ble Sri Justice P.Naveen Rao, Judge, High court for the State of Telangarra

¶60

1. Sri Pathipaka Ram Prasad, Advocate, Hiqh court for the state of Telangana

¶61

1. Smt.R.Madhavi Latha, Advocate High court for the state of Telangana/Socia I Worker

¶62

AWARD

¶63

The dispute between the^{parties havingbeen referredfor} determination^{to the LoK ADALAT and the parties having compromised the} case/matter, the^{following award is passed in terms of settlement'}

¶64

The appellant^{herein and Sri Azar Sravan Kumarand Sri AzarKishan} nuo, uoiroJuiui^{rot the appeltantancl the respondentNq 1 th,rough} frla.Sriutnu^{K,Kumar,fqunug"i, NationalInsurance Company Ltd} '^{and their} counsel are^{present. rne iraiterhas been settledamicably between the} parties.

¶65

That the^{respondent/respondentNo'1} agreed to pay enhanced compensation^{of Rs.1,03,000/-(Rupees one} lakh three thousand onlY) against the^{awardedamount of Rs'92,379/-}

¶66

r,\f-.

¶67

-)-

¶68

That the respondent/insurance company is to deposit an amount of Rs.1,03,000/- (Rupees one Iakh three thousand only) within a period of two' (2) montlrs from the date of receipt of a copy of this award. In the event of dgfault, the agreed amount shall carry interest at 60lo per annum from the date of default.

¶69

The appellant/claimant is permitted to withdraw the entire amount as and when deposited by the insurance company.

¶70

The parties are informed that the court fee, if any, paid by any of them shall be refunded.

¶71

No order as to the costs of appeal

¶72

ALt^{t- l\1} Appellant

¶73

rb, k. i a2r"ra ce^CoLrd For Natio,ra err6dl SignalorY Respondent No.!

¶74

/2 . ,,' ):rYat-, Counsel for appellant

¶75

Counsel for Respondent No.L_

¶76

Fs Chairman

¶77

M ember

¶78

*^\g Member

¶79

Date: 14-12_2019

¶80

ttee

Syed Aleem v. Syed Ismail and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Syed Aleem v. Syed Ismail and Anr.

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

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

Chilamcharla Prabhakar Vs Chilamancharla Ravindranath Tagore and 12 others

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