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

2010 Supreme(Pat) 1091

PATNA HIGH COURT
Mungeshwar Sahoo, J.
Dhirendra Kumar Ojha @ Tuntun
Versus
Birendra Kumar Ojha
M.A. No. 601 of 2008
Decided On : MAY 3, 2010

Headnote:Motor Vehicles Act, 1988-Section 140-Accident-Appellant (owner) directed by Tribunal to pay compensation of Rs. 50,000/to claimant-respondent-At the time of accident the vehicle was not insured with Insurance Company and it was being driven by appellant-owner-No illegality in impugned order-Appellant directed to pay amount of Rs. 50,000/- u/s 140 within one month. (Paras 4 to 7)

JUDGEMENT

1. Heard the learned counsel Sri Sidharth Harsh on behalf of the appellant and the learned counsel Sri Rakesh Kumar Samarendra on behalf of the respondent.

2. This Misc. Appeal has been filed by the owner of the vehicle against the order dated 9.9.2008 passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Aurangabad, in M.V. Case No. 34 of 2007/62 of 2008. By the impugned order the learned Tribunal has directed the appellant owner to pay compensation of Rs. 50,000/- to the claimant respondent within one month from today under Section 140 M.V. Act.

3. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the deceased was unauthorized occupant of the vehicle and he was driving the vehicle himself. The vehicle was a goods vehicle and, therefore, the owner is not liable to pay compensation.

4. From perusal of the impugned order it appears that the learned court below found that at the time of accident the vehicle bearing Registration No. BR26A- 8177 was not insured with the lnsurance Company. The said vehicle was ueing driven by the owner, Dhirendra Ojha.

5. The contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that the deceased was driving the vehicle is a matter of consideration after adducing the evidence by the parties.

6. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I find no illegality in the impugned order. Accordingly, this Misc. Appeal is dismissed.

7. However, the appellant is directed to pay the amount of Rs. 50,000/- awarded by the court below under Section 140 of M.V. Act within one month from today.

8. It is stated that Rs. 25,000/- has been deposited before this Court by Challan No. 13 dated 9.4.2009. The said Rs. 25,000/- be sent to the court below forth with so that it may be paid to the claimants. The remaining Rs. 25,000/- must be deposited within one month from today as directed above.

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 Back to top