Nandakishore vs Bajaj Allianz General Insurance ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 9576 Ker

                                  1
MACA.No.2614 OF 2020

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

                  THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS

    MONDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 1ST CHAITHRA, 1943

                       MACA.No.2614 OF 2020(D)

  AGAINST THE AWARD IN OPMV 631/2018 DATED 09-03-2020 OF MOTOR
              ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL , PALAKKAD


APPELLANT/S:

                NANDAKISHORE
                AGED 22 YEARS
                S/O. JAYAKUMAR, 2/320, SIVANANDAM,
                THUMBILAMPARAMBU, KANNADI P.O., PALAKKAD, KERALA-
                678 701.

                BY ADV. SRI.BABY MATHEW

RESPONDENT/S:

                BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD,
                REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, RAAGVAVIS
                CENTRE, GROUND, IST AND 2ND FLOOR, 21A NETHAJI
                NAGAR, NANJUNDAPURAM MAIN ROAD, RAMANATHAPURAM,
                COIMBATORE, TAMIL NADU-641 015.
                COMMUNICATION ADDRESS. BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL
                INSURANCE CO. LTD., IST FLOOR, MANGALAM TOWERS, OPP
                TOWN BUS STAND, TB ROAD, PALAKKAD-678 001. (INSURER
                OF LORRY BEARING REG.NO.KL/09/M/7304 POLICE NO.O G-
                181-503-1831-00000714. VALID FROM 3.8.2017 TO
                2.8.2018.

                R1 BY ADV. SRI.LINTO FRANCIS

     THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 22.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
                                  2
MACA.No.2614 OF 2020



                         C.S.DIAS, J.
              ======================
                  MACA No.2614 of 2020
              ======================
           Dated this the 22nd day of March, 2021.

                          JUDGMENT

Admitted.

2. Sri.Linto Francis enters appearance for the

respondent.

3. The respective learned counsel appearing for the

parties submits that the subject-matter in dispute has been

settled between the parties as per the joint compromise

petition dated 19.3.2021 signed by the parties and counter

signed by the respective counsel.

4. I perused the joint compromise petition and found

the same to be in order. Hence, the appeal is allowed in

terms of the joint compromise petition dated 19.3.2021,

which shall form part of this judgment.

Sd/-

                                           C.S.DIAS

Sks/22.3.2021                               JUDGE