ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, LEO SHOPPING COMPLEX 44-45 RESIDENCY ROAD BANGALORE-560 025 BY ITS DEPUTY MANAGER SMT. SUDHA GANESH Vs. SRI M.R. GOVIND S/O SRI. M.R. BHAT NO. 15, SUMUKHA, NEAR JALLI MACHINE VIDYARANYAPURA POST BANG

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is before this Court assailing the order dated 06.11.2009 passed in Misc. No. 1/2008. which is impugned at Annexure -A to the petition. The petitioner has also assailed the judgment and award dated 01.03.2007 passed in MVC No. 7162/2005. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the petition papers. Notice to respondents No. 1 and 2 has been held sufficient and there is no representation on behalf of the respondents.

(2.) THE petitioner Insurance Company was respondent No. 1 in MVC No. 7162/2005. The said claim petition was disposed of on 01.03.2007 awarding the compensation of Rs. 2,38,500/ with interest. One of the contentions, which had been put forth by the petitioner while opposing the claim petition is that the vehicle bearing No. KA 13 M 1940 in fact was not involved in the accident, but has been falsely implicated. Ultimately, since no evidence had been tendered on behalf of the respondent -Insurance Company, the judgment and award came to be passed. The petitioner -Insurance Company construing the same as one having been passed exparte against them filed a Misc. Petition No. 1/2008. The said petition is still pending consideration before the trial Court. In the said Misc. Petition No. 1/2008, the petitioner herein also filed an application under Section 151 of CPC. the said application came to be rejected. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court.

(3.) THIS Court while ordering notice to the respondents on 08.12.2009. had granted interim order of stay of the judgment and award passed in MVC No. 7162/2005, subject to the condition that the amount be deposited before the Tribunal. The amount is said to have been deposited before the Tribunal. The issue therefore is as to whether any prejudice would be caused to the petitioner, if the respondents withdraw the said amount, which is deposited before the Tribunal. In that regard, as to whether any stay ought to have been granted by the Court below against the operation of the judgment and award passed in MVC No. 7162/2005.