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

INDIRA BANERJEE, SAHIDULLAH MUNSHI
Samir Basu – Appellant
Versus
Shri Ram Prosad Rajbhar – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :K.K. Das, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Krishanu Banik, Advocate.

JUDGMENT :

Sahidullah Munshi, J.

1. Present appeal arises out of the judgment and award dated 17th June, 1989 passed by the learned Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at Calcutta, 10th Bench, City Civil Court, in MACC No.205 of 1981. The appeal has been filed by Shri Samir Basu and the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. respectively the owners of the offending vehicle No.WBS-2845 (a private bus) and the Insurance Company with which the offending vehicle was insured at the date of accident.

2. The claimant/respondent filed MACC Case No.205 of 1981 claiming a compensation amounting to Rs. 1,50,000/- (One Lakh Fifty Thousand) only out of which Rs. 60,000/- (Sixty Thousand) only was assessed for general damages and Rs. 90,000/- (Ninety Thousand) only for special damages stating, inter-alia, that:-

(a) A private bus being No. WBS-2845, while proceeding along Kidderpore Road at a very high speed from north to south, dashed a tram without blowing horn and defying all applicable traffic rules, as a result of which the said bus overturned causing serious injuries to several persons including the claimant.

(b) One Gita Banerjee, an injured in the said accident, succumbed to her injuries at SSKM Hosp



























































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