Back
V. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO
S. Khader Vali S/o Md. Abdul Karim – Appellant
Versus
S. Hameeda Banu W/o Maqbul Ahammed – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
V. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO, J.
1. The appellant is the Claimant in M.V.O.P. No. 350 of 2006 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-IV Additional District Judge, Kurnool and the respondents are the respondents in the said case.
2. Both the parties in the appeal will be referred to as they are arrayed in claim application.
3. The claimant filed a Claim Petition under sections 163-A and 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the respondents praying the Tribunal to award an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation for the injuries sustained by the petitioner in a Motor Vehicle Accident occurred on 16.02.2005.
4. The brief averments of the claim petition are as follows:
The burden of proof on the claimant to establish injuries sustained in a road accident, the standard of proof required, and the liability of the insurance company in case of negligence by the driver ....
Liability of the insurance company to satisfy the award in favor of a third party, even in the case of absence, fake, or invalid license of the driver, and the procedure for the insurance company to ....
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....
Disability to part of body cannot be treated as disability to whole body.
Disability to part of body cannot be treated as disability to whole body.
The delay in lodging the First Information Report cannot be a ground to doubt the case of the claimant.
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
