DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER AND DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER KARNATAKA STATE ROADTRANSPORT CORPORATION RAICHUR DIVISION RAICHUR Vs. KAMAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE main ground on which this appeal is presented by THE ksrtc, is that THE compromise petition filed before THE lok adalath-though not signed by THE appellant, deputy general manager and divisional controller, ksrtc, or THE law officer, THE contesting respondent in THE court below - was acted upon and a finding recorded THEreon against THE interest of THE appellant and that THErefore THE finding does not bind THE appellant,

(2.) SRI ramesh, learned counsel appearing for the insurer-3rd respondent, drewour attention to the decision of the Supreme Court in byram pestonji gariwala v union bank oflndia and others, AIR 1991 SC 2234. In paragraphs 40, 43 and 44 of the judgment referring to a similar plea put forward in that case arising out of an order under order 23, rule 3, cpc read with order 3, rule 1 and section 11, the Supreme Court held as follows: