Sri Ashoka v. (By Sri, MN Maheshwarappa Advocate)
Judgment
(By Sri, MN Maheshwarappa Advocate) 4ppellant ir Bas c eci inrtr Owi r cV\ ! 32 ‘T 1 I F;;!. Ii OL tT T i_ i 1 2h hi 1 / P ii i Ii S ) s i i 3 The New India Asuranee Co ltd.. III Cross. Nehru Road. Rept. Dv its Branch Marhuici Shimoia Respondents (By Sri, AKBhat, Advocate for R3) Mi \ I5 NELL) I \ND VVARi) 1)15 JElL 1 01 01 2000 1 ASSI 1) I FAST ITACK ( 01 IRE SH1MOCA I ARIT Y NLLOWING FT IL ( I MM PF II TION D iIL1) JCDC I I OR ( OMPENSATION AND SEEKING EM IANCEMEN I 01 (OMPF:NS NIION 200 ON ii IL LII 1 lifE II l)(1MF N I ‘S 1/3(11 OF Mt iN MV( NO I AGAINSI 01 .\( 11fF APPEAl COMING ON FOR (ON( ILIAIION hF I ORF ION AD \LU F TEll 1 01 LOWING HF F F REED N IDE ORDF H DAIF D 29 09 2011 uhF BF INC ON( ILIATION ORDF H IS PNSSFI) CONCILIATION ORDER flie learned counsel the claimant al)I)ehlant arid the learned roujisel for the ReQpondent — husuranec Company aIon with its represetitat1v are present 2 i’x±ter prolonged redotiutiflfls, hc hatter IS settle Tle 1 tnt Clai tar I ‘ Igi eed ( rid th d ixit I r d onli n FAei e c r t ) lat ha aLrr J( J hi Id] F till] IF at a (Ei ti1 I .0 1 i-lI t arit— this r3t’ 1j 1it Ti ,.;.. -FT t i1 I \iF irc I ut 3 of pn parat ion of axard failmg which the said amount shall carry intc rc sr a 9( c p a from th€ datc of d laulf till the dat of deposit t mi’ irnseeltaneous first ipped stands dispos d olin terms of tin Joint m nrc I tic ax at d ol the I ribunal shall stands modified ac cordingly I)rar np the Award accordingly RR
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.