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

1995 Supreme(Kar) 459

S.A.HAKEEM, B.PADMARAJ
NALINA – Appellant
Versus
M. D. ,KARNATAKA GOVERNMENT INSURANCE DEPARTMENT – Respondent


B. PADMARAJ, J.

( 1 ) BOTH these appeals arise out of the same judgment and award passed in M. V. C. No. 266 of 1991, on the file of M. A. C. T. No. IX, Bangalore, and, therefore, they are dealt with together.

( 2 ) ON 19. 9. 1990 at about 8. 15 p. m. , one Nalina was crossing the road near the Ulsoor Lake from south to north, when a. car bearing registration No. CAG 5287 came from east to west on that road and hit her. As a result of this accident, she sustained serious injuries. On the ground that the accident was due to rash and negligent driving of the car by its driver, the injured lady, nalina, claimed a compensation of Rs. 12,00,000/- only, for the injuries sustained by her in the accident before the Claims Tribunal against the respondents, who were the owner and the insurer of the car.

( 3 ) THE respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to the claim petition contested the claim by filing their separate written statements.

( 4 ) IN the course of the trial before the Tribunal, PWs 1 to 6 were examined and Exhs. P-1 to P-23 were got marked on the side of the claimant. On the side of the respondents, the driver of the car was examined as RW 1 and Exhs. R-1 to R-3 were marked.

( 5 ) ON an ap



































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