Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
MARLI VANKUNG
Cholamandalam M/s General Insurance Company Ltd. r/b Sh Gautam Pradhan Asst Manager – Appellant
Versus
Vanlalhriati and Ors. W/o Hranghluna (L) – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts of the vehicular accident and claim. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. court's observation on the core facts. (Para 6 , 12) |
| 3. arguments from both parties regarding the claim. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. court's reasoning and application of principles. (Para 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 5. conclusion and modified compensation awarded. (Para 16 , 17) |
JUDGEMENT :
MARLI VANKUNG, J.
Heard Mr. Roshan Subedi, learned counsel for the appellant Insurance Company. Also heard Mr. Lalremtluanga, learned counsel for the claimant respondent No. 1.
2. This is an appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the impugned Judgment & Award dated 02.11.2023 passed by the learned Member-cum-Presiding Officer of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Aizawl in MAC Case No. 43/2019, wherein the learned Tribunal had awarded the sum of Rs. 20,49,000/- with 7% interest per annum, from the date of filing the application i.e., on 06.08.2019 to be paid by the Insurance Company/appellant.
3. Facts of the case in brief is that the daughter of the claimant Lalrempuii, aged 34 years died in the vehicular accident on 05.04.2019 at 2:15 PM, when one tripper bearing registration No. MZ 01 M-7405 belonging to
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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
