2012 Supreme(SC) 2695
AFTAB ALAM, CHANDRAMAULI KR.PRASAD
Sukhwant Singh – Appellant
Versus
Union of India through The Secretary, Ministry of Defence – Respondent
Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner(s):- Ravindra Bana and Rono Mohanty, Advocates.
For the Respondent(s):- Ashok Bhan, Sr. Adv. Wasim A. Qadri, A. Dev Kumar, Sunita Sharma, Sudarshan Singh Rawat, Ashwani Garg, D.S. Mahra, Purnima Bhatt, Gargi Khanna, Anil Katiyar, B.V. Balram Das, Manpreet Singh Doabia, Sudarshan Singh Rawat, Anil Shrivastav, Ritu Raj Biswas, Manjit Singh and Tarjit Singh,Advocates.
For the Kamal Mohan Gupta :- Manish Singhvi, AAG, Ashutosh Kumar Singh, Irshad Ahmad, Advocates.
For the R. Gopalakrishnan :- Abhishek Atrey, Rahul Verma, Sivika Jain, G.N. Reddy, C. Kannan, Ravi Shankar, Riku Sarma and Navnit Kumar,Advocates.
For the Corporate Law Group :- Kuldip Singh, R.K. Pandey, H.S. Sandhu, Mohit Mudgil, Gopal Singh, Manish Kumar, Gopal Singh, Rituraj Biswas, Amitesh Kumar, Ravikant and Priti Kumari, Advocates.
For the Gopal Singh :- Edward Belho, Lhusisato Inabu, K. Enatoli Sema, Nimshim Vashum, Balaji Srinivasan, Sanjiv Sr. Adv., Ujjwal Banerjee, P. Parmeswaran, Tara Chandra Sharma, Neelam Sharma, Khwairakpam Nobin Singh,Adv. Mr. Sapam Biswajit Meitei, Techi Poto, V.G. Pragasam, S.J. Aristotle, S. Prabhu Ramasubramanian, Rakesh Kumar Khanna,Sr. Adv., Surya Kant, Pranav Vyas, Dushyant Prashar, Seema Rao, Neeraj Kumar Sharma, Purnima Jauhari, A. Mariarputham,AG, Aruna Mathur and Yusuf Khan, Advocates.
For the Arputham Aruna & Co. :- Hemantika Wahi, S. Panda, K.N. Madhusoodhanan, M.T. George, Sunil Fernandes, Astha Sharma, Venika Tomar, Mukul Singh, Shrish Kumar Misra, Promila, S. Thananjayan, Vibha Datta Makhija, Pankaj Pandey, Raja Chatterjee, Abhijit Sengupta, B.P. Yadav, Sampa Sengupta, Prakash Kumar, Amrednra Kr. Choubey, Krishnanand Pandeya, V.N. Raghupathy, Atul Jha, Sandeep Jha, Dharmendra Kumar Sinha, Guru Krishna Kumar,AAG, B. Balaji, Sanjay V. Kharde, Asha Gopalan Nair, Vijendra Kumar, Shaikh Chand Saheb, Binu Tamta and Puneet Jain, Advocates.
For the Pratibha Jain :- Bina Madhavan, Ramesh Babu M.R.G., Prakash, Jagjit Singh Chhabra, Naresh K. Sharma, Ranjan Mukherjee, A. Subhashini, Sunil Satyarthi and Merusagar Samantaray, Advocates.
ORDER :
Civil Appeal No.1987 of 2011
1. The appellant - an army personnel, while on nine days' casual leave, suffered an injury in a scooter accident that rendered him unsuitable for any further military service. He was, therefore, discharged from service.
2. His claim for the disability element of pension was rejected by the concerned authorities holding that the injury suffered by him was not attributable to military service as stipulated in Regulation 173 of the Pension Regulations of Army, 1961.
3. The appellant filed a suit claiming disability pension. The trial court dismissed the suit. Against the judgment and order passed by the trial court, the appellant preferred an appeal, which was allowed and the suit filed by him was decreed. Against the judgment and decree passed by the appellate court, the Union of India preferred a second appeal before the Punjab and Haryana High Court.
4. During the pendency of the second appeal, the Armed Forces Tribunal came to be constituted and the second appeal was transferred to the Chandigarh Bench of the Armed Forces Tribunal where it was registered as T.A. No. 775 of 2010, Union of India v. Sukhwant Singh.
Civil Appeal No.1988 of 2011
5. The app
Click Here to Read the rest of this document
Back
