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

2004 Supreme(SC) 1345

R. C. LAHOTI, G. P. MATHUR
KAHLON – Appellant
Versus
K. PARAMASIVAM – Respondent


ORDER

1. THE PETITIONER ALONG WITH HIS WIFE AND DAUGHTER MET WITH AN ACCIDENT WHEN THEY WERE RETURNING TO NEYVELI FROM CHENNAI IN A HIRED CAR AS A RESULT OF WHICH THEY SUSTAINED INJURIES AND WERE ADMITTED TO GOVERNMENT HOSPITAL, DINDIVANAM. THE PETITIONER WAS GIVEN FIRST-AID BUT HE BECAME 100% DISABLED. THE PETITIONER FILED A CLAIM CASE BEFORE THE MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL AT CUDDALORE, TAMIL NADU. THE PETITIONER BEING 100% DISABLED COULD NOT D CONTINUE HIS JOB AND SHIFTED BACK TO HIS HOME TOWN GURDASPUR, PUNJAB. HENCE, THIS TRANSFER PETITION FOR THE TRANSFER OF THE CLAIM CASE FILED BY THE PETITIONER AT CUDDALORE, TAMIL NADU TO GURDASPUR, PUNJAB.

2. SERVICE IS COMPLETE, BUT NONE APPEARS FOR THE RESPONDENTS TO OPPOSE THE PRAYER FOR TRANSFER.

3. HAVING HEARD THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER, THE TRANSFER PETITION IS ALLOWED. MACT PETITION NO. 138 OF 2000 TITLED KAHLON V. K. PARMASIVAM PENDING BEFORE THE MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, CUDDALORE, TAMIL NADU, IS DIRECTED TO BE TRANSFERRED TO THE MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, GURDASPUR, PUNJAB.

4. THE PRESIDING OFFICER, MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, CUDDALORE, TAMIL NADU SHALL, SOON ON COMMUNICATION OF THIS ORDER, TRA

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