Back
V. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO
Nakarikanti Abdul – Appellant
Versus
Gunjiboina Narsimha Rao – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. The appellants are claim petitioners and the respondents are respondents in M.V.O.P.No.1648 of 2012 on the file of the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-III Additional District Judge, Guntur.
2. For the sake of convenience, both the parties in the appeal will be referred to as they are arrayed in the claim petition.
3. The claim petitioners filed the petition under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 claiming compensation of Rs.6,00,000/- for the death of Shaik Hasanabi, who is wife of 1st petitioner, mother of petitioner Nos.2 & 3 and daughter-in-law of petitioner Nos.4 & 5, in a motor vehicle accident that took place on 21.10.2012.
4. The brief averments in the petition filed by the petitioners are as follows:
On 21.10.2012 at about 6.00 p.m. the deceased along with others was proceeding on a tractor-trailer bearing registration Nos.AP 07TA 6030 & 6031, which was loaded with cotton bales, as a loading and unloading coolie from Devarampadu fields to go to Gullapalli and when they reached near Devarampadu fields, the driver of the tractor-trailer drove the same in a zig zag manner rashly and negligently and thereby, the tractor-trailer turned turt
The principle of 'pay & recovery' should be applied in cases where the insurance company is directed to deposit the compensation amount and recover the same from the owner of the offending vehicle.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the liability of the insurance company to pay compensation for accidents involving vehicles insured under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, and the cal....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
