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

1991 Supreme(Kar) 3

M.RAMA JOIS, K.J.SHETTY
SUIT RUKMANIYAMMA – Appellant
Versus
A. M. VENKATA SWAMY – Respondent


Advocates:
K.Abhinav Anand, S.P.SHANKAR

RAMA JOIS, J.

( 1 ) IN these three appeals presented under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, the following common question of law arises for consideration. Whether the No Fault Liability in the case of death caused by a motor acsident, is Rs. 15,000/- as fixed in Section 92-A of the 1939 act which was in force on the date of accident, which gave rise to the claim petitions out of which these appeals arise, or rs. 25,000/- as fixed in Section 140 of the motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which came into force on 1-7-1989, which was in force on the date on which the Tribunal made the orders?

( 2 ) THESE appeals have come up for order sand by consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, they have been taken up for final hearing and are disposed of by this common order.

( 3 ) BRIEF fads of the case are thcse :- (A) M. F. A. No. 1896/1990 :- The accident which resulted in the death of the deceased took place on 25-5-1989. The claim petition was filed on 9-6-1989. In the claim petition, an interim award in respect of No Fault Liability as required to be made under Section 92-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, was sought for. When this matter was pending, on 1-7-1989 Motor














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