Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

MANAGING DIRECTOR versus R.AMIRTHAM

High Court of Madras

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Managing Director v. R.Amirtham - CMA. No.3118 of 2006 [2007] RD-TN 143 (10 January 2007)


In the High Court of Judicature at Madras

Dated: 10.01.2007

Coram

The Honourable Mr. Justice P. SATHASIVAM
and
The Honourable Mr. Justice N.PAUL VASANTHAKUMAR

Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.3118 of 2006


The Managing Director,
Metro Transport Corporation,
Pallavan Salai,
Chennai. ..Appellant


Vs


1. R.Amirtham

2. Hariprasad Balaji

3. Minor Manjula

4. G.Gowri
[Minor represented by
1st respondent herein] ..Respondents



Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, against the judgment and decree dated 15.02.2006 made in O.P.No.212 of 2003 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (VI Judge, Court of Small Causes) at Chennai.


For appellant : Mr. K.S.Narasimhan

For respondents : Mr. S.Udhayakumar


JUDGEMENT



(Judgment of the Court was delivered by P. SATHASIVAM,J.,) Both the appellant and the respondents filed a Memo of Compromise incorporating various terms and conditions. As per the "Memo of Compromise", the respondents/claimants are entitled compensation of Rs.15,75,000/- with interest at 7.5 per annum from the date of petition till date of payment. The Memo also contains apportionment details, including the minor 3rd respondent. Except minor third respondent, other respondents/claimants are permitted to withdraw their respective share with interest. In so far as the share of minor third respondent, the amount payable to the minor shall be invested in a Nationalised Bank under reinvestment scheme for a period of two years. The first respondent, namely, R.Amirtham-mother of the minor Manjula is permitted to withdraw interest accrued in respect of the share of the minor 3rd respondent. The Memo of Compromise was signed by the appellant, respondents and their respective counsel. The Memorandum of Compromise dated 15.12.2006, is hereby recorded. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is ordered on the above terms. No costs. kh To

The VI Judge

Court of Small Causes

(Motor Accident Claims Tribunal)

Madras.

[PRV/9216]


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.