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

2018 Supreme(Pat) 822

PRAKASH CHANDRA JAISWAL
Manju Devi – Appellant
Versus
Mani Bhushan Kumar – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Mukesh Prasad Singh, Adv., Shailendra Kumar, Adv.

JUDGMENT :

PRAKASH CHANDRA JAISWAL, J.

1. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 happen to be owners of the bus and the offending truck respectively and aforesaid two vehicles have been insured by respondent no.3-National Insurance Company Limited. From perusal of the impugned judgment, it appears that there is no order of pay and recovery. Hence no step for fresh service of notice is required to be taken for respondent nos. 1 and 2 and on the submission of the learned counsels for the appellants and respondent no. 3, heard both the parties on this miscellaneous appeal.

2. This miscellaneous appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 16.11.2011 and award dated 12.12.2012 passed by the 9th Additional District Judge cum Motor Vehicle Accident Claim Tribunal, Muzaffarpur in Claim Case No. 204 of 2007 / 22 of 2011 whereby the learned Tribunal allowing the claim petition directed the opposite party no.3- National Insurance Company Limited to pay the compensation to the tune of Rs. 2,74,000/- along with the interest at the rate of 6% per annum till the payment of compensation to the claimants.

3. Factual matrix of the case is that claimants filed Claim Case No. 204 of 2007 / 22 of 2011 under Sect










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