THE BRANCH MANAGER v. SMT. GANGAMMA @ BHAJANTHRI GANGAMMA
Case at a glance
Outcome
Withdrawn
Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn
Provisions considered
- Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 s. 173(1)
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2024 CONCILIATORS PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P. SANDESH & SMT. P.V. KALPANA, MEMBER M.F.A.No.5208/2022(MV) (Lok Adalat No.2277/2024) BETWEEN THE BRANCH MANAGER M/S SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., NO.5/4, 3RD FLOOR, S V ARCADE DEVARACHIKKANAHALLI ROAD BANNERUGHATTA MAIN ROAD IIMB POST, BANGALORE REPTD. BY ITS ASSISTANT MANAGER (BY SRI B C SHIVANNE GOWDA, ADVOCATE) AND 1 . SMT. GANGAMMA @ BHAJANTHRI GANGAMMA W/O LATE B. ANJAPPA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS 2 . SRI GANGADHAR S/O LATE B. ANJAPPA AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS ...APPELLANT 2 BOTH ARE R/AT NO.2-180 MANURU VILLAGE, MADAKASIRA ANANTHAPURA DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH – 515303 AND ALSO R/AT BETTAHALSUR VILLAGE CHIKKAJALA POST BANGALORE RURAL. 3 . SRI ILYAZ PASHA S/O AMEER JANSAB AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS NO.18/53, 4TH CROSS, DODDABETTAHALLI LAYOUT VIDYARANYAPURA POST BANGALORE – 560097. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI SOMASHEKARA K M, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.03.03.2022 PASSED IN MVC NO.4013/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE CHIEF JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MEMBER, PRL. MACT, BENGALURU, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.17,21,720/- WITH INTEREST AT 6 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION AND ETC. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR CONCILIATION BEFORE NATIONAL LOK ADALAT, THE FOLLOWING CONCILIATION ORDER IS PASSED. 3 CONCILIATION ORDER The learned counsel appearing for the appellant has filed a memo for withdrawal of the appeal as not pressed. In view of the said memo, the learned counsel for the appellant is permitted to withdraw the appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. The amount in deposit, if any, is ordered to be transmitted to the Tribunal. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- MEMBER SN
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — s. 173(1).
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No treatment data yet for this judgment in the Courts & Cases corpus.
Absence of data is not a statement about the judgment’s standing — the corpus covers only judgments we index and link with cited evidence.