Back
R.D.DHANUKA
Nutan Milind Kulkarni – Appellant
Versus
Bajirao Dnyandeo Patil – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. arguments regarding compensation claims (Para 7 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 28 , 29 , 35) |
| 3. court's analysis of negligence and income evidence (Para 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 50 , 55 , 66 , 68 , 70 , 72 , 74 , 76 , 78 , 81 , 83) |
| 4. legal ratio for calculating dependency loss (Para 54 , 57 , 92) |
| 5. final conclusion and order (Para 94 , 95 , 96) |
JUDGMENT
R D Dhanuka, J. - By this First Appeal filed under section 173 of the MOTOR VEHICLES ACT , 1988, the appellants (original claimants) have impugned the judgment and award dated 5th April, 2004 partly rejecting the claims made by the appellants. Some of the relevant facts for the purpose of deciding this First Appeal are as under :
2. The appellant no.1 is the widow, the appellant no.2 is the daughter, the appellant nos.3-A and 3-B are legal heirs of the original appellant no.3, who was father of the deceased Milind Dinkar Kulkarni. The appellant no.4 is brother of the said Milind Dinkar Kulkarni. It was the case of the appellants herein (original claimants) that Milind Dinkar Kulkarni along with the ap
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
