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

2012 Supreme(Raj) 678

MOHAMMAD RAFIQ
Jai Krishna Pareek – Appellant
Versus
Uma Sharma – Respondent


Advocates Appeared
Sandeep Mathur, for Non-Claimant/Appellant;
J.P. Gupta and V.P. Mathur, for Respondents

RAFIQ, J.—For stated reasons, delay in filing appeal is condoned. Application under Section 5 of Limitation Act stands allowed. Matter is heard on merits.

2. This appeal has been filed by non-claimant Jai Krishna Pareek for quashment of award dated 03.08.2007 of learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ajmer, in MAC Case No.9/2005, whereby learned Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.1,68,000/- to claimant in a death case, and held the insurance company liable to pay only Rs.1,00,000/- and, for remaining amount, appellant, who was driver and owner of offending vehicle, is held liable for payment.

3. Learned counsel appearing for appellant has contended that learned Tribunal has erred in law while restricting liability of insurance company to pay compensation to the extent of Rs.1,00,000/- only, whereas as per the judgment of Supreme Court in General Manager, United Insurance Co. Ltd. (The) vs. M. Laxmi & Ors. : MACD 2008 (SC) 418 = 2009(1) CCR 119 (SC) when there is package policy as in the present case, the insurance company has to be held liable to indemnify the owner for payment of compensation jointly and severally. It is, therefore, prayed that appeal be allowed and accordingly th












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