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

1988 Supreme(Guj) 103

A.P.RAVANI, P.M.CHAUHAN
GOVIND KANA – Appellant
Versus
KANA TIDA MOKARIA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: AKSHAY H.MEHTA, C.K.THAKKER

A. P. RAVANI, J.

( 1 ) ADMIT. Mr. A. H. Mehta waives service of notice on behalf of respondent No. 2. By consent of the parties the matter is ordered to be heard today.

( 2 ) THE appellant is a workman who has lost before the Commissioner for Workmens Compensation and hence preferred this appeal. It was his case that on 26/05/1984 while he was in employment of respondent No. 1 he was driving the truck belonging to respondent No. 1 and he met with an accident and received serious injuries; that he was receiving monthly wages of Rs. 1000. 00 per month; that after the accidental injury he took treatment and even after the treatment he is suffering from permanent partial disability and therefore he is entitled to claim compensation from the respondents. Respondent No. 2 is the Insurance Company with which the truck in question was insured by respondent No. 1. The appellant-petitioner claimed Rs. 60 0 as and by way of compensation and also claimed penalty to the extent of 50 per cent of the amount of compensation and prayed that the aforesaid amount be directed to be paid to him with 12% interest per annum. The petitioner prayed for other expenses of Rs. 10 0 also.

( 3 ) OPPONENT No. 1 t













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