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

2003 Supreme(Kar) 3

M.F.SALDANHA, M.S.RAJENDRA PRASAD
MAYAMMA – Appellant
Versus
SIDDAIAH – Respondent


Advocates:
A.Ananda Shetty, BIRDY AIYAPPA, H.G.Ramesh, N.RAJASEKHARAN NAYAR

M. F. SALDANHA, J.

( 1 ) WE have heard the appellant's learned Advocate as also the respondents' learned Advocates. At the very outset, the appellant's learned counsel has assailed the judgment of the Tribunal which has taken cognizance of the fact that admittedly the deceased Dollegowda had fallen off from the top of the moving bus No. CTX 8688. There are conflicting versions with regard to what had exactly happened, the appellant's learned Advocate submitting that the deceased had climbed on to the roof of the bus to remove the luggage and that as often happens, the driver had just sped away, as a result of which, the deceased who was on top, fell off, sustained fatal injuries and died. The Tribunal has relied on the evidence of P. W. 2 who claims to be one of the persons travelling along with the deceased on the roof of the bus. He also happens to be the complainant or informant and the First Information Report has been produced wherein he has stated that there were about twenty persons on the top of the bus and that the deceased was one of them. His version is that the deceased was sitting on the luggage and that the driver of the bus was driving at a fast speed, that there was








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