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

1968 Supreme(Cal) 81

P.N.MUKHERJEE, A.K.DUTTA
PIRISKA ROZARIO – Appellant
Versus
FORD FOUNDATION – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Amarnath Roy Chowdhury, C.C.GANGULY, Mrinal Kumar Ghose, Nani Gopal Dutta

MOOKERJEE, J.

( 1 ) THIS Rule raises some important questions. It arises out of a proceeding under the Motor Vehicles Act.

( 2 ) THE points for consideration are whether the tribunal under the Act, hearing claim petitions, has power to order substitution of the legal heirs and representatives of a deceased claimant and. If so, under what circumstances and with what effect.

( 3 ) THE Instant proceeding was started as a claim, proceeding by one Augustine Paul Rozario, who filed this claim case for compensation on account of Injuries, sustained by him in a motor accident, which took place on March 2, 1965, in Ballygunge Circular Road. During the pendency of the said claim case, the above claimant died on October 5. 1965. This fact was brought to the notice of the tribunal below on November 2, 1965, by the learned Advocate for the deceased claimant and he prayed for time to file a petition for substitution of the heirs and legal representatives of the said deceased. That petition was originally rejected by the tribunal below by its order No. 3, dated November 2, 1965, on the ground that on the death of Rozario his cause-of-action did not survive and so no question of substitution of









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