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

2022 Supreme(Del) 2083

MANOJ KUMAR OHRI
Gopi Chand Gupta – Appellant
Versus
Mohd. Mohsim – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Manish Maini, Advocate, for the Appellant.
Arihant Jain, Advocate, for the Respondent No. 3.

JUDGMENT

Manoj Kumar Ohri, J. By way of the present appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the `Act'), the appellant has sought modification of judgment dated 05.08.2013 passed by the learned ADJ-cum-PO, MACT, Rohini Courts, Delhi in MACT No. 418/13/08.

FACTS OF THE CASE

2. For the sake of felicity, brief facts, as noted by the Tribunal, are reproduced hereinbelow:

    "1. On the unfortunate day of 28.11.2007 the injured/petitioner Sh. Gopi Chand Gupta alongwith his son Sh. Roopak were going on foot and they were proceeding towards their residence at Sector 127, Rohini from Rithala via Japani Park, Sector 11, Rohini. At about 3.09 PM when injured and his son reached at Rithala road near Taxi stand-Japani Park, Sector 11, Rohini then a Tata 407 tempo bearing its registration No. DL 1LC 8217 being driven by the respondent No. 1 at a very high speed, rashly, negligently without taking necessary precautions without observing proper look out, violating the traffic rules and without blowing any horn came from Rithala Metro Station side and suddenly took sharp right turn and violently hit one cyclist and then hit one two wheeler scooterist nam

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