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

2006 Supreme(Ker) 628

KURIAN JOSEPH
Sherifa Beevi – Appellant
Versus
P. Komu – Respondent


Judgment :-

Whether a petition filed under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act can be permitted to be amended to be one under Sections 140 and 166 is the question to be considered in this writ petition. There are related issues as well. Petitioners are the claimants in O.P.(MV)No.2006/1995 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kozhikode and the respondents herein are the respondents therein. The claim petition was filed for compensation on account of the death of the elder son of the first petitioner and brother of petitioners 2 to 7. The accident took place on 13-5-1995. The claim petition was filed, according to the averments in the writ petition, under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. It is the contention of the petitioners that proceedings were thus instituted hoping to have expeditious disposal of the case. Finding that even after four years the matter could not be disposed of, they filed an interlocutory application for amending the petition to one under Section 166 of the Act – I.A.No.1633/1998. A prayer under Section 140 was also sought to be added in the process. By the impugned order dated 10-9-1999 the Tribunal dismissed the application hol



















































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