Dismissed

M/S Reliance General Insurance Company Limited, Hyd. v. Kummari Shiva Kumar and Another

Telangana HC15 Sept 2022MACMA/2455/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal as withdrawn by the appellant insurance company. Consequently, the appeal was disposed of in terms of the Award passed by the High Court Legal Services Committee, confirming the lower tribunal's judgment and decree.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed as withdrawn; judgment and decree of lower tribunal confirmed; award implemented.

M/S Reliance General Insurance Company Limited, Hyd… — Motor Accident Claims | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

13217 l

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

THURSDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTYTWO

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

¶6

MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANE OUS APPEAL NO: 2455 OF 2011

¶7

{ppeal^filed under Section¹⁷³ of^M.V.Act against the Order and decree made in OP.NO.675 of 2007 daled 24-5-20'10 on the file of the Court of the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum- ll Addl. District and Sessions Judge [FTC] Medak at Sangareddy.

¶8

Between:

¶9

M/S RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY Ll[/|TED, Hyderabad, Through its Manager, Deccan Chambers, 4th floor, 6-3-666/8, Somajiguda, Hyderabad.

¶10

...APPELLANT/RESPONDENT No.2

¶11

AND

¶12

KUMMARI SHIVA KUMAR, S/o Mallappa Caste Profession, making the pots etc. Ryo Chilamamid Village, Jharasangam Mandal, Medak District.

¶13

...RESPONDENT No.1/PETITIONER

¶14

Abid Khan, S/o Jabeel, age: Major Owner of lorry No.ATT 9599 Ryo H.No.3-486, Momin Street, Zaheerabad, District: Medak.

¶15

...RESPONDENT No.2/RESPONDENT No.1

¶16

l.A. NO: 2 OF 201'l(MACMAMP. NO:4458 OF 2011)

¶17

Petition under Section^'151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay the operation of the Judgement and Decree dated 24-O5-2O1O made in OP No. 675 of 2OO7 on the file of the Hon'ble Chairman, Motor Accident Claims

¶18

Tribunal -Cum-ll Addl District & Sessions Judge (FTC). at Srrngareddy^pending Disposal of Appeal.

¶19

Counsel for the Appe lant: SRI A. RAMAKRISHNA REDDY, Al)\TOCATE

¶20

Counsel forthe Resp,rndent No.1: SRI l. RAVINDER REDDY,.aI)VCTCATE Counsel for the Respondent No.2: - - -^-

¶21

The Court made the f< llowing: JUDGMENT

¶22

THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI

¶23

M.A.C.M.A. No .2455 ot 201 1

¶24

¶25

JUDGMENT:

¶26

The matter was withdrawn before the Lok Adalat and consequent

¶27

to the withdrawal, Award has been^passed by the Lok Adalat.

¶28

Accordingly, this MACMA is disposed of in terms of the Award

¶29

passed by the Lok Adalat. No order as to costs.

¶30

Consequently, miscellaneous^{petitions pending} if any, shall stand

¶31

closed

¶32

SD/. K. SAILE DEPUTY REGIS

//TRUE COPY'

SECTIO N OFFICER

To,

The Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-Cum-ll Additional and Sessions Judge (FTC) at Sangareddy (with records)

¶37

One CC to SRI A. RAMAKRISHNA REDDY, Advocate [OPUC]

¶38

One CC to SRI l. RAVINDER REDDY, Advocate [OPUC]

¶39

Two CD Copies BN

¶40

(Along with a copy of Lok Adalat Award) ....k

HIGH COURT

DATED:1 5109'2022

JUDGMENT

MACMA.No.2,[55 ot 2011

¶45

1 r- :.,1 : l:
It: AY
i ,i
j .: ,j
s+
t\ b;
<br>J
'":V
/

¶46

DISPOSING OF TTIE MACMA IN TERMS OF AWARD PASSED BY THE I.OK ADALAT WITHOUT COSTS

¶47

\-{
>j

¶48

BEFORE THE LOK ADALAT HIGH COURT LEGAL SERYICES COMAAITTEE FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA,^HYDERABAD.

¶49

[Under^{Section l9 of lhe Legol SewicesAulhorities Acl, 1987 (Cenkdl Act)t}

¶50

Date:13-08-2022

¶51

Present:1.Hon'ble Sri Justice Sambasivarao Naidu Judge, High Court for the State of Tetangana 2.5ri Chattari Nageswara Rao, Advocate, Member

¶52

NL SER
oo
HIGH COURT {--t
I(t LOKAOALAT
* *
*trY.
-State oi 1

¶53

3.Smt.Nandita Guha, Advocate, Member

¶54

lrtACA{A.No.2455 of 201 1

¶55

(Before the Hon'ble High Court)

¶56

_. ASATNSJ O.P.No.675 o( 2OO7

¶57

(On the fite of the lrlotor Accirlent Ctaims Tribunal - Cum - ll Addt Districl € Ff,ip{A,iltf" (FTc) :: r.ledak at sansareddy)

¶58

8et^reen:

¶59

M/s.Retiance GeneraI lnsurance Co.Ltd.,

¶60

Through its Manager, Deccan Chambers, 4s Ftooi,

¶61

6-3-666 I B, Somajiguda, Hyderabad.

¶62

.. ..Appettant/ Respondent No.2

¶63

And

¶64

1 . Kummari Shiva Kumar S/o lv{attappa,

¶65

aged about 30^years, Occ: Caste Profession,

¶66

making the^pots etc., R/o Chitamamid Viltage,

¶67

Mandat: Jharasangam

¶68

District: Medak.

¶69

...Respondent No.1 / Petitioner

¶70

Abid Khan S/o Jabeet,

¶71

aged about: Major, Occ: Owner of Lorry

¶72

bearing No. ATT- 9599,

¶73

R/o H.No.3-4-86, Momin Street,

¶74

Zaheerabad, District: M€dak.

¶75

...Respondent No.2/ Respondent No.1

¶76

AWARD

¶77

'1. This is an appeat fited by the appettant/lnsurance Company.

¶78

The Learned Counsel for the Appettant/lnsurance Company represented that^the lnsurance Company is witMrawing the appeat fited by it.

¶79

,rl,', I

¶80

3.. The said repres€ ntation is recorded and the appeat is disrrissed as withdraEn, 9/ confirming the j( dgment and decree of the Court/Tribunal bekrw. The amount if any remaining ur paid to the claimant(s) shat( be paid by the lnsurance Company within one montt from the date of receipt of the award, alonll ^'ith interest.

¶81

The Respondent/^)etitioner is permitted to withdraw the entir-. amount.

¶82

This Award shatl be subject,to verification of cross appeat/cross objection, if any, fited by the ResF ondents, otherwise the parties are at liberty to appty for reca[l of this Order/Awa( .

¶83

Court fee paid or this appeat shall be refunded.

¶84

No costs.

¶85

For Reliance General lnsurance Co. Ltd.
ttld&,
Authqlsed Sftnatory
Appettants/ Respondents
I lnsurance Company
h "N?^ailtu?t-
.cHnMN #Me ER V,l:MBI:R
HIG+{ COUKT

M/S Reliance General Insurance Company Limited, Hyd. v. Kummari Shiva Kumar and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Reliance General Insurance Company Limited, Hyd. v. Kummari Shiva Kumar and Another

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

R.Konda Reddy Vs Mrs.Y.Sailajarani and another

Bachu Raju , Rajeshwar Vs The State of Telangana

Birru Savitri Vs Vanaparthy Venkanna and 2 Ors.

M/S National Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs N. Deva Sahayam and 2 Others

Sadaboina Venkatanarayana, Karimnagar Dist Vs Thummanapally Chilukamma, Karimnagar Dist and 3 Othrs

Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs Smt. Krishnamma and 3 Others