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

1991 Supreme(Ker) 160

VARGHESE KALLIATH, GUTTAL
Musthafali – Appellant
Versus
Subair – Respondent


Judgment :-

Varghese Kalliaih, J.

This appeal raises a question of limitation. A minor, represented by the guardian, is the appellant. The minor filed an application before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal for compensation for the injuries he sustained in a motor accident. He was represented by his next friend/ guardian. Appellant claimed Rs.50,000/- as compensation for the injuries he sustained. The claim was made on different counts.

2. The Tribunal, after assessing the evidence in the case, determined the compensation payable to the appellant at Rs.20,000/-. But the Tribunal dismissed the application on the ground that the application was filed beyond the statutory period allowed for filing the claim petition. Before us, there is no serious controversy as to the reasonableness of the quantum of compensation.

3. Counsel for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal grievously erred in holding that the application has been filed out of time and that it is barred by limitation. S.110A(3) of the Motor Vehicles Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the act) mandates that an application for compensation arising out of an accident of the nature specified in sub-s.(1) of S.110 of the Act sha



















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