Lok Adalat No.518/10 v. GANAFATHI, 5/0 SEETHARAM HEGGAD, AGE: M.AJOR, OCC
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
(SRI. K L PATIL, ADV. FOR R2 RI NOTICE DISPENSED WITH) RESPONDENTS AND THIS MFA IS FILEt) ViS 30(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WCA/NF NO.61/2005 ON THE FILE OF TIlE LABOUR OFFICER AND COMMISSIONER FOR OWRKMEN’S COMPENSAtiON. HAVERI. PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETItiON FOR COMPFNS4TION AND SEEKiNG ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. DATED:1 1.12.2006 PASSED AWARD TillS \PPEAL COMING ON FOR C (ThCILIA1ION BEFORE LOK APALAT AFTER BEING REFERRED ‘vlI)E ORDER D4TE1) On 12 2010, THE FOLLOWING CONCILIATION ORI)ER IS PASSED CONCILIATION ORDER Both sides submitted that. the have reached at mutual settlement The appc Ilant has agreed to reten e from thc second respondent a lumpsum payment of 66.000 ?-(inclusive of interest) i e. over and above the amount iwardcd 1)3 the Commissioner. towards the full and final settlement of his claim madc befort the Commissione; The sec ond respon& nt submits that he is r*greeablt to pay in lumpsum, ‘.‘ ‘wr ant. abo’c die arr our aiarrk a 1)’ the r üssi it lung he t ill •11d (inI scttlt ireit 3 + 13w; di arti’ri, s’it di i re . • i 5 •stCCfl s.1 iCL)Sit ‘ tt’\.c .nisi.r. L I )l’jcc.tc” ic’ir “r )nas of i in! ‘hi arIrLvi 10’ c f ‘ r’ jt er i . . y.nevf ‘ • 4 I
Out of the agreed amount. flO.000 - 1w kept in fixed deposit in an nationalized hank for .i period of fin. yc an with a proiision to withdiau the interest peruxhcalh and the b.*l ni’e amount be r leased in favow the appellant: dainiant. 1 St I
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.