SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2004 Supreme(SC) 893

ARIJIT PASAYAT, C.K.THAKKER
Pramod Kumar Agrawal – Appellant
Versus
Mushtari Begum – Respondent


JUDGMENT

ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court which did not find any error in the judgment of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bijnor (in short the `Tribunal) either on facts or law to warrant interference.

3. Background facts in a nutshell are as follows:

The present respondents 1 to 10 filed a Claim Petition in terms of Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (in short the `Act) claiming compensation from the present appellants and United India Insurance Company Ltd., (hereinafter referred to as the `insurer).

4. According to the claimants, Amir Hassan (hereinafter referred to as the `deceased) sustained injuries and subsequently died due to an accident on 11.11.2000 at about 4.00 p.m. The accident occurred on account of rash and negligent driving by Kamal Kumar Agrawal (appellant No.2) who was the driver of the vehicle No. UPN-8975 which was involved in the accident. It was stated that appellant No.1 was the owner of the vehicle, and that the vehicle was subject-matter of insurance with the insurer. Claim of Rs. 5,10,000 was made as compensation.

5 The insurer took the plea that the dr













Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top