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

1992 Supreme(Kar) 63

SHANTHAMMA – Appellant
Versus
KAMALAMMA (DECEASED) BY L. RS – Respondent


Advocates:
A.K.BHAT, C.K.KAMBEYANDA

N. VENKATACHALA, J.

( 1 ) THE short question which arises for our consideration in this appeal is whether the sum not exceeding 50% of the amount of compensation which could be recovered from the employer by way of penalty for default in paying that amount of compensation due under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (for short 'the act') is the liability arising under the act for which insurance coverage is compulsory under Section 95 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (for short 'm. v. act' ).

( 2 ) MATERIAL tacts which have given rise to the said question are briefly these: respondent No. 2, the new India assurance co. Ltd. Has issued an insurance policy under Section 95 of the m. v. act covering the liability for death or personal injury of the driver of the autorikshaw with registration No. Cam 1326 in favour of the owner of that autorikshaw respondent-1 herein. Respondent No. 1 while had employed one kuppuswamy as a driver of that autorikshaw there occurred an accident on 14/15-8-1987 in the course of driving of that autorikshaw, a motor vehicle, and as a result of that accident, the said driver who had suffered bodily injuries succumbed to them and died. The appellants who wer







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