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

2018 Supreme(SC) 129

DIPAK MISRA, A. M. KHANWILKAR, D. Y. CHANDRACHUD
Vijay Kumar Rastogi – Appellant
Versus
Uttar Pradesh State Roadways Transport Corporation – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :- Pranab Kumar Mullick, Adv.
For the Respondent:- Garima Prashad, Adv.

JUDGMENT

A.M. Khanwilkar, J.

The present appeals take exception to the judgment of the High Court of Delhi in MAC Appeal No.393/2009 dated 6th December, 2016, whereby the High Court declined to enhance the compensation amount awarded to the appellant by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and to the order dated 18th January, 2017 dismissing the Review Petition No.20 of 2017. 2. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (for short, "the Tribunal") vide order dated 4th April, 2009, awarded compensation to the appellant and his father-in-law to the tune of Rs. 5,59,584/- and Rs. 4,53,131/-, respectively, against which four appeals were filed before the High Court, one each by the appellant and his father-in-law and two cross appeals by the respondent, all of which were disposed of by the impugned judgment. The appellant alone has assailed the impugned judgment and prays for grant of enhanced compensation amount. 3. As can be gleaned from the claim petition, the appellant and his father-in-law suffe


















































































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