1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.3974 OF 2010 MASTER ADARSH U. ..APPELLANT(S) VERSUS U. GIRIDHARA GOWDA AND ORS. ..RESPONDENT(S) O R D E R 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore in M.F.A.No.8549 of 2006 (MV), dated 12.11.2009. 2. The appellant/claimant, who was a minor at the time of the incident, has met with an accident and sustained grievous injuries. On the claim made by the appellant/claimant, the Civil Judge (Sr. Division) and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Madikeri (for short, “the Tribunal”), had awarded a compensation of Rs.1,80,000/- with interest. 3. Being aggrieved by the compensation so awarded by the Tribunal, the appellant/ claimant preferred appeal before the High Court. The High Court, by its impugned
2 judgment and order, has accepted the appeal filed by the appellant/ claimant in part and modified the award passed by the Tribunal and enhanced the awarded amount to Rs.4,12,500/- from Rs.1,80,000/- with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization. Aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the High Court, the appellant/claimant is before us, in this appeal, by Special Leave. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties to the lis. 5. After going through the judgments and orders passed by the Tribunal as well as the High Court and keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that the compensation awarded by the High Court be further enhanced by another sum of Rs.4,00,000/- 6. Accordingly, while allowing this appeal, we modify the judgment and order passed by the High Court. The appellant/claimant is now entitled for a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- over and above the compensation so awarded by the High Court with interest at the rate of 6 per cent from the date of the order passed by the High Court, without any deductions whatsoever.
3 7. We clarify that the compensation shall be paid by the respondent Nos.2 and 3, as expeditiously as possible at any rate within a period of six weeks from today. Ordered accordingly. ............CJI. (H.L. DATTU) ..............J. (ARUN MISHRA) NEW DELHI, SEPTEMBER 29, 2015.
4 ITEM NO.61 COURT NO.1 SECTION IVA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal No(s). 3974/2010 MASTER ADARSH U Appellant(s) VERSUS U.GIRIDHARA GOWDA & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 29/09/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MISHRA For Appellant(s) Mrs. Kanchan Kaur Dhodi,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. S. N. Bhat,Adv. Mr.Chaturvedi, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The Civil Appeal is allowed, in terms of the signed order. Pending application(s), if any, is/are also disposed of. (G.V.Ramana) (Vinod Kulvi) AR-cum-PS Asstt.Registrar (Signed order is placed on the file)
$$ 1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.3974 OF 2010 MASTER ADARSH U. ..APPELLANT(S) VERSUS U. GIRIDHARA GOWDA AND ORS. ..RESPONDENT(S) O R D E R 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore in M.F.A.No.8549 of 2006 (MV), dated 12.11.2009. 2. The appellant/claimant, who was a minor at the time of the incident, has met with an accident and sustained grievous injuries. On the claim made by the appellant/claimant, the Civil Judge (Sr. Division) and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Madikeri (for short, "the Tribunal"), had awarded a compensation of Rs.1,80,000/- with interest. 3.Signature Not Verified Being aggrieved by the compensation so awarded byDigitally signed byRamana Venkata GantiDate: 2015.10.06 the Tribunal, the appellant/ claimant preferred appeal10:43:54 ISTReason: before the High Court. The High Court, by its impugned 2judgment and order, has accepted the appeal filed by theappellant/ claimant in part and modified the award passedby the Tribunal and enhanced the awarded amount toRs.4,12,500/- from Rs.1,80,000/- with interest @ 6% p.a.from the date of petition till the date of realization.Aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the High
Court, the appellant/claimant is before us, in thisappeal, by Special Leave.4. Heard learned counsel for the parties to the lis.5. After going through the judgments and orderspassed by the Tribunal as well as the High Court andkeeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances ofthe case, we are of the opinion that the compensationawarded by the High Court be further enhanced by anothersum of Rs.4,00,000/-6. Accordingly, while allowing this appeal, wemodify the judgment and order passed by the High Court.The appellant/claimant is now entitled for a sum ofRs.4,00,000/- over and above the compensation so awardedby the High Court with interest at the rate of 6 per centfrom the date of the order passed by the High Court,without any deductions whatsoever. 37. We clarify that the compensation shall be paid bythe respondent Nos.2 and 3, as expeditiously as possibleat any rate within a period of six weeks from today. Ordered accordingly. ............CJI. (H.L. DATTU) ..............J. (ARUN MISHRA)NEW DELHI,SEPTEMBER 29, 2015. 4ITEM NO.61 COURT NO.1 SECTION IVA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSCivil Appeal No(s). 3974/2010MASTER ADARSH U Appellant(s) VERSUSU.GIRIDHARA GOWDA & ORS. Respondent(s)
Date : 29/09/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MISHRAFor Appellant(s) Mrs. Kanchan Kaur Dhodi,Adv.For Respondent(s) Mr. S. N. Bhat,Adv. Mr.Chaturvedi, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The Civil Appeal is allowed, in terms of the signed order. Pending application(s), if any, is/are also disposed of. (G.V.Ramana) (Vinod Kulvi) AR-cum-PS Asstt.Registrar (Signed order is placed on the file)
LISTED ON 22.9.2015 COURT no. 1 ITEM NO. 67 SEC. IVA IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3974 OF 2010 Master Adarsh U. ...Petitioner VERSUS U. Giridhara & Ors. ...Respondents OFFICE REPORT This is an appeal against the Judgment and Order dated 12.11.2009 of the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore in MFA No. 8549 of 2006 (MV). There are three respondents in this matter. Respondent No. 2 is represented through Mr. S.N. Bhat, Advocate. Service of notice is complete on respondent No. 1 and respondent No. 3, but no one has entered appearance on their behalf. It is submitted that Mrs. Kanchan Kaur Dhodi, Counsel for the appellant has on 9.1.2013 filed statement of case but counsel for the respondent has not filed statement of case and stipulated time has already expired. However, he has filed statement of objection on behalf of respondent No. 2. The appeal above mentioned is listed before the Hon'ble Court with this office report. Dated this 19 th day of September, 2015. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR COPY TO: 1. Mrs. Kanchan Kaur Dhodi, Adv. 2. Mr. S.N. Bhat, Adv. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
ITEM NO.94 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION IVA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR M K HANJURA Civil Appeal No(s). 3974/2010 MASTER ADARSH U Appellant(s) VERSUS U.GIRIDHARA GOWDA & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 23/04/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mrs. Kanchan Kaur Dhodi,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr.D.P.Chaturvedi,adv. Mr. S. N. Bhat,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The office report indicates that the Ld.counsel for the appellant has already filed the statement of case. The office report further is that the Ld.counsel for the respondent No.2 has failed to file the statement of case although he has been notified to do so by letter dated 17.01.2012 of this Registry . Service of notice is complete on the respondent Nos.1 & 3 but no one has entered appearance on their behalf. Order XIX Rule 32 of the Supreme Court Rules,2013 provides that if the respondent has entered appearance and does not file a statement of case within the time, as provided in Sub Rule(1) (i.e. 35 days) it shall be presumed that he does not desire to lodge the same. … ...2
ITEM NO.94 -2- In view of the rule position cited above, the matter shall be processed for listing before the Hon'ble Court under the rules. (M K HANJURA) Registrar SB
( ITEM NO.94 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION IVA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR M K HANJURA Civil Appeal No(s). 3974/2010 MASTER ADARSH U Appellant(s) VERSUS U.GIRIDHARA GOWDA & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 23/04/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mrs. Kanchan Kaur Dhodi,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr.D.P.Chaturvedi,adv. Mr. S. N. Bhat,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The office report indicates that the Ld.counsel for the appellant has already filed the statement of case. The office report further is that the Ld.counsel for the respondent No.2 has failed to file the statement of case although he has been notified to do so by letter dated 17.01.2012 of this Registry. Service of notice is complete on the respondent Nos.1 & 3 but no one has entered appearance on their behalf. Order XIX Rule 32 of the Supreme Court Rules,2013 provides that if the respondent has entered appearance and does not file a statement of case within the time, as provided in Sub Rule(1) (i.e. 35 days) it shall be presumed that he does notSignature Not Verified desire to lodge the same.Digitally signed bySushma Kumari BajajDate: 2015.04.2509:57:22 ISTReason: ......2ITEM NO.94 -2- In view of the rule position cited above, the matter shall
be processed for listing before the Hon'ble Court under the rules. (M K HANJURA) RegistrarSB( ITEM NO.94 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION IVA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR M K HANJURA Civil Appeal No(s). 3974/2010 MASTER ADARSH U Appellant(s) VERSUS U.GIRIDHARA GOWDA & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 23/04/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mrs. Kanchan Kaur Dhodi,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr.D.P.Chaturvedi,adv. Mr. S. N. Bhat,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The office report indicates that the Ld.counsel for the appellant has already filed the statement of case. The office report further is that the Ld.counsel for the respondent No.2 has failed to file the statement of case although he has been notified to do so by letter dated 17.01.2012 of this Registry. Service of notice is complete on the respondent Nos.1 & 3 but no one has entered appearance on their behalf. Order XIX Rule 32 of the Supreme Court Rules,2013 provides that if the respondent has entered appearance and does not file a statement of case within the time, as provided in Sub Rule(1) (i.e. 35 days) it shall be presumed that he does notSignature Not Verified desire to lodge the same.Digitally signed bySushma Kumari BajajDate: 2015.04.2509:57:22 ISTReason:
......2ITEM NO.94 -2- In view of the rule position cited above, the matter shallbe processed for listing before the Hon'ble Court under the rules. (M K HANJURA) RegistrarSB
$ITEM NO.16 COURT NO.11 SECTION IVA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil)....../2010 CC 6145/2010(From the judgement and order dated 12/11/2009 in MFA No. 8549/2006of The HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE)MASTER ADARSH U Petitioner(s) VERSUSU.GIRIDHARA GOWDA & ORS. Respondent(s)IA NO.1(c/delay in filing SLP)Date: 26/04/2010 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SINGHVI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASOK KUMAR GANGULYFor Petitioner(s) Mrs. Kanchan Kaur Dhodi,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned. Leave granted. (A.D. Sharma) (Phoolan Wati Arora) Court Master Court Master