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

K.VINOD CHANDRAN
Narayanan Puthiya Veettil – Appellant
Versus
V. Nisha – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
M. Sasindran, Adv., Johny Thomas, Adv., E.M. Joseph, Adv., M. Jacob Murickan, Adv., G. Road, Adv., M. Sasindran, Adv.

JUDGMENT :

K. Vinod Chandran, J.

[MACA 1836/2011, MACA.987/2011, MACA.2044/2011]

These appeals arise from a common award passed by the Tribunal in two claim petitions. The present appeals are from O.P.(MV) No.223 of 2004.

2. The claimant, appellant in M.A.C.A.No.1836 of 2011, was travelling in a bus bearing registration No.KL-13/A 7495 when it collided with another bus and the appellant suffered serious injuries. The accident occurred on 25.09.2003. The appellant had to amputate his right hand from above elbow. The appellant claimed a compensation for the injuries suffered as also the disability occasioned.

The Tribunal found both the bus drivers to be negligent and mulcted liability at 50% on each of them. Though the Insurance Companies have also approached this Court [M.A.C.A.Nos.987 and 2044 of 2011], there is no challenge to the negligence so found by the Tribunal. The appeal of the assessee is confined to the enhancement claimed and those of the insurers assail the quantum granted by the Tribunal.

3. The appellant-claimant was admitted to Unity Health Complex, Mangalore, where

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