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

1996 Supreme(Raj) 916

GOPAL LAL GUPTA
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Rukhmani – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellant:Mr. R.K. Mehta, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Mr. J.S. Choudhary, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

1. - These two appeals arise out of award passed by the learned Member, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bikaner on 26.7.1989 in Claim Case No. 23 of 1986.

2. The owner and the driver have challenged the award by filing Appeal No. 275 of 1989 pleading that the accident had occurred because of rash and negligent driving of jeep No. RJS 6395 and, the claim should have been decreed against the owner, driver and the insurer of that vehicle. The United India Insurance Co. Ltd. by filing Appeal No. 261 of 1989 has challenged this part of the direction in the award that it may recover the sum of Rs. 15,000/- and interest paid under Section 92-A of the Motor Vehicles Act by filing separate suit.

3. The claimants case was that Vijay Kumar, aged 20, was travelling in jeep RJS 774 driven by Mahi Ram on Bikaner-Nokha road and that this jeep collided with jeep RJS 6395 which was coming from opposite direction and driven by Shyam Sunder. The claimants case was that Vijay Kumar suffered fatal injuries and died after 2 days. Rs. 5,02,080/- were claimed as compensation. In the reply, Mahi Ram denied that he was driving the jeep. The case set up by Guman Giri, owner, was that he had already s



















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