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

2004 Supreme(AP) 258

T.CH.SURYA RAO
K. Matura Bai – Appellant
Versus
A. Shiva nageswar Rao – Respondent


T. SURYA RAO, J.

( 1 ) SINCE all the three appeals arise out of one and the same judgment dated 7. 7. 1999 passed by the learned Chief Judge, City Civil Court, hyderabad, in OP No. 129 of 1996, they can be disposed of together.

( 2 ) THE second respondent/insurer is the appellant in C. M. A. No. 3021/1999, the third respondent/apsrtc ( the Corporation for brevity) is the appellant in C. M. A. No. 1069/2000 and the claimants are the appellants in C. M. A. No. 2550/1999. The insurer and the Corporation in the respective appeals are assailing the finding of the tribunal below that the Respondents 1 to 3 are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation. In addition thereto, the corporation is assailing the quantum of compensation assessed by the Tribunal. The claimants are questioning the inadequaeyof the compensation.

( 3 ) THE claimants filed O. P. No. 129 of 1996 claiming a compensation of Rs. 4 lakhs for the death of the husband of the first claimant and father of the Claimants 2 and 3 in a motor accident that occurred on 8. 1. 1996 at about 7. 20 p. m. , on account of the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the bus bearing No. AP-7t-2288 owned by the first responde





















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