THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER Vs. NAGARAJA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Sri N. Krishna Swamy, learned counsel appearing for the appellant-insurer is in appeal calling in question the judgment and award passed by the MACT, Holalkere in M.V.C.Nos.204/2008, 203/2008, 205/2008.

(2.) It is the contention of Sri N. Krishna Swamy that the Tribunal committed a serious error in directing the appellant-insurer to deposit the compensation and recover from respondent No.1, the owner, after having recorded a finding that there was no existing policy as on the date of the accident.

(3.) In M.F.A.No.4456/2010, respondents No.2 and 3 are served and unrepresented. Notice on respondent No.1 has been held sufficient by order dated 28.01.2015. In M.F.A.No.4151/2010, notice on respondent No.1 has been held sufficient and respondents No.2 and 3 are represented by Sri L. Srinivasa Babu. In M.F.A.No.4454/2010, respondent No.1 is represented by Sri R. Shashidhara, respondent No.2 is served and unrepresented and service on respondent No.3 has been held sufficient.