S. Murali Krishnan vs G. Ramesh and Lokesh <BR> G. Ramesh Vs S. Murali Krishnan and Lokesh

N.K. Patil, J.—These two appeals by the claimant and the owner of the offending vehicle are directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 13/11/2012 passed in MVC No. 5371/2011, by the XIX Additional Small Cause Judge & XLI ACMM and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore (SCCH-17), (hereinafter referred to as ''Tribunal'' for short). We have heard learned counsel for both the parties.

During the course of the arguments, learned counsel appearing for both the parties submitted that, these matters have been settled amicably between the parties and to that effect, they have filed a Joint Memo dated 22.10.2013 duly signed by both the parties and attested by them. Therefore, they submitted that, the instant appeals may be disposed of in terms of the said Joint Memo.

The terms and conditions of the Joint Memo dated 22/10/2013 reads as under:-

The appellant and respondent No. 1 in the above case most respectfully submits as follows:

It is submitted that, the appellant herein has filed a petition in M.V.C. No. 5371/2011 before the Hon''ble XIX Addl. SCJ, MACT & XLI ACMM at Bangalore (SCCH-17) claiming compensation of an amount of Rs. 92,55,000/- from the respondents herein for the accident occurred on 10/02/2011 at about 3.45 p.m. The respondent No. 1 is the owner of the canter lorry bearing NO. GA-08-T-5551. The respondent No. 2 is the driver of the said canter lorry. There is no insurance for the above said canter lorry.

It is submitted that, after the trial and after hearing both sides the Hon''ble trial court, i.e., SCCH-17, was pleased to pass an order on 13/11/2012 awarding the compensation amount of Rs. 14,84,000/- (Rupees Fourteen Lakhs Eighty Four Thousand Only) along with interest at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of the petition till its realization and the respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation.

It is submitted that feeling aggrieved by the above said award passed by the Hon''ble trial court, i.e., SCCH-17, the appellant herein has preferred the above appeal before this Hon''ble court for enhancing the compensation amount. In fact the appellant herein also filed the Execution petition in Ex. Petition No. 386/2013 before the Hon''ble trial court, i.e., SCCH-17 and same is pending adjudication.

It is submitted that, the respondent No. 1 herein also filed an appeal in MFA. No. 11729/2012 before this Hon''ble Court challenging the award passed in the above said MVC. No. 5371/2011 dated 13/11/2012. The said appeal is also pending adjudication before this Hon''ble Court.

It is submitted that, meanwhile due to the intervention of the friends and well wishers of the appellant and the respondent No. 1 herein, they have decided to settle the above matter amicably.

It is submitted that, as per the understandings between the appellant arm the respondent No. 1 herein, the respondent No. 1 has agreed to give a total compensation amount of Rs. 15,50,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Lakhs Fifty Thousand only) to the appellant herein as the full and final settlement amount.

Today a sum of Rs. 12,50,000/-. (Rupees Twelve Lakhs Fifty Thousand only) is paid through DD bearing No. 032218 dated 21/10/2013 drawn on Central Bank of India, Kadugodi Branch, in the name of the claimant Sri. Muralikrishnan S. and also a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- is paid by way of cash today before this Hon''ble court to enable the claimant to meet his immediate needs and discharge the alleged hand loans. As such totally Rs. 15,50,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Lakhs Fifty Thousand only) has been paid to the claimant herein by the respondent No. 1. The receipt of the said amount has been acknowledged by the appellant herein as full and final settlement amount.

Since the full payment has been made by the respondent No. 1 herein as stated supra the respondent No. 1 & 2 both are absolved from the liability of making any payment towards the award amount.

It is submitted that, as the full and final payment is made, the above said Ex. Petition No. 386/2013 filed by the appellant against the respondents herein has to be withdrawn by the appellant herein.

In view of the compromise petition filed by the appellant and the respondent No. 1 in the above case, the appeal filed by the respondent No. 1 in MFA No. 11729/2012 is also to be withdrawn by the respondent No. 1 before this Hon''ble court.

This compromise petition has been filed by the appellant and the respondent No. 1 out of their free will and volition and there is no coercion from anybody.

Wherefore, the appellant and the respondent No. 1 in the above case most respectfully pray that this Hon''ble court be pleased to dispose of the above appeal in terms of the above compromise in the above case to meet the ends of justice and equity.

Placing the submissions made by learned counsel for both the parties and the terms and conditions of the Joint Memo dated 22/10/2013 as stated supra on record, the instant appeals filed by the claimant and the owner of the offending vehicle stand disposed off in terms of the Joint Memo dated 22.10.2013 filed by the parties, at their risk.

The statutory amount deposited by the appellant in M.F.A. No. 11729/2012 shall be refunded to him, personally or through his counsel, forthwith.