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

2012 Supreme(Raj) 310

MAHESH BHAGWATI
Badri Lal – Appellant
Versus
Ramavtar – Respondent


Advocates Appeared
S.N.Meena, for Appellant

BHAGWATI, J.—Having argued for some time, the learned counsel for the appellant submitted that he did not press the appeal on merits but canvassed that the Tribunal while dismissing the claim petition directed that the non claimants shall recover the amount of interim compensation i.e. Rs.25,000/-, which was paid for 'No Fault Liability' under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act to the claimant. Learned counsel implores that the non claimants may be directed not to recover the said amount of 'no fault liability' from the claimant. To justify his prayer, he has cited one judgment of Apex Court rendered in the case of Indira Devi & Ors. vs. Bagada Ram & Anr. reported in 2010 ACJ 2451 = 2010(2) CCR 873 (SC) in support thereof.

2. In the case of Indira Devi & Ors. (supra), the Apex Court relying upon the judgment of the Supreme Court delivered in the case of Eshwarappa vs. C.S.Gurushanthappa, C.A. No. 7049 of 2002 = 2010(2) CCR 818 (SC), observed that the Tribunal was patently in error, in directing for the refund of the amount of 'no fault compensation' already paid to the claimant, by the Insurance company. The High Court was equally in error in missing out this grave mistake in the





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