Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
ROBIN PHUKAN
New India Assurane Co. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Champa Lahkar, W/o. Late Bikash Jyoti Lahkar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ROBIN PHUKAN, J.
Heard Mr. K.K. Bhatta, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. A.K. Gupta, learned counsel for the respondents.
2. This appeal, under Section 173(1) of the M.V. Act, is directed against the judgment and award dated 15.05.2014 and review order dated 09.07.2014, passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sonitpur, in MAC Case No. 140/2009.
3. It is to be noted here that vide impugned judgment and award dated 15.05.2014, the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sonitpur (‘Tribunal’, for short) had directed the appellant herein to pay a sum of Rs. 8,96,164/-, to the claimant/respondent No. 1 herein, being the compensation with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till payment to the claimant, and vide impugned review order dated 09.07.2014, the learned Tribunal had awarded a sum of Rs. 9,23,738/-, by modifying the earlier award.
Background facts:-
4. The background facts, leading to filing of the present appeal, are briefly stated as under:
“On 05.03.2009, at about 3:45 p.m., when the husband of the claimant/respondent No. 1 herein, namely, Bikash Jyoti Lahkar was returning from the Forest D
Compensation is justified under the Motor Vehicles Act if the accident arose from the use of a vehicle, even with indirect connections, and negligence must be established on the preponderance of prob....
The claimant must establish negligence for a successful claim under Section 166 of the M.V. Act, and the Tribunal's reliance on insufficient evidence can lead to erroneous judgments.
The main legal point established is the requirement to prove rashness and negligence in claims under Section 165 of the Motor Vehicles Act, and the applicability of res ipsa loquitur in determining n....
In motor vehicle accident claims, the absence of eyewitnesses does not preclude establishing negligence; the standard of proof is based on preponderance of probabilities.
Claimant is the mother of the deceased as such she is entitled to get the filial consortium for the death of her son.
Motor Vehicles Act is a benevolent piece of legislation. Certain guiding principles have evolved over years which form bedrock for evaluating evidence and determining compensation under Motor Vehicle....
The court clarified the distinction between claims under Sections 163-A and 166 of the MV Act, emphasizing the necessity of establishing negligence for appropriate compensation.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
