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

2015 Supreme(Bom) 919

K.L.WADANE
Rajan Banawali – Appellant
Versus
Dinesh Shirodkar – Respondent


Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :D. Pangam, Advocate.
For the Respondents:R2, S. Bharne, R4, U.R. Timble, Advocates.

Judgment :

1. The present appeal is preferred by the appellant dissatisfied with the amount of the compensation granted by the judgment and order dated 22.12.2009 passed by the Presiding Officer, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal for the Taluka of Salcete, at Margao(“Presiding Officer” for short) in Claim Petition no.163/2008.

2. Parties shall hereinafter referred to as per their original status in the claim petition.

3. The brief facts of the case may be stated as follows:-

Claimant filed the petition under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation based on structure formula.

On 29.8.2007, at about 03.30 hours, the claimant was proceeding from Mumbai to Margao. He was driving the vehicle namely Swaraj Mazda bearing no.GA-02-U-8686, owned by Shri Nooruddin Shaikh/respondent no.3. When he reached at Old Goa bypass road, all of a sudden the front right side tyre of the vehicle burst, as a result of which, the claimant lost control over the vehicle and met with an accident with another vehicle owned and driven by the respondent no.1, i.e. Tata Tipper truck bearing no.GA-02-T-



























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