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

1974 Supreme(Raj) 319

B.P.BERI
Pushpa – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Petitioner:R.M. Bhansali, Advocate.
For the Non-Petitioner:B.C. Bhansali, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

1. - This revision application was listed for orders on exparte stay order granted by this Court on 12.8.1974.

2. The matter involved is small and the learned counsel are agreed that let this revision application be disposed of after hearing the parties. I have, therefore, heard the learned counsel for the parties.

3. This a widow's claim for compensation on account of her husband's death by accident, and she has claimed compensation before the Tribunal created under section 110 D of the Motor Vehicles Act. On behalf of the widow on list of the witnesses was submitted and no process fee was paid and the lerned District Judge indulgently allowed time to the petitioner to produce the witnesses. Even then the witnesses did not appear and the grievance of the applicant is that one is the Station House Officer of Udaimandir and the other is a servant of the Union of India who would depose regarding the service conditions of the deceased Banshilal deceased and these two witnesses are not likely to appear as per witnesses without the process of the Court. The rest of the witnesses, the learned counsel says, the applicant will produce herself. It is not necessary to enter into the c






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