Back
VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
Ramesh Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Manju Devi – Respondent
JUDGMENT
1. The present appeals are listed in the orders category. However, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, they are being heard and decided finally.
S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 569/2021
2. The instant appeal preferred by appellant Ramesh Kumar who is owner of the vehicle is barred by limitation of 738 days. An application has been preferred for condonation of delay in filing the appeal.
3. The application preferred under section 5 of the Limitation Act is not opposed by the counsel for the respondents.
4. For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed. The delay of 738 days in filing the appeal is condoned.
5. The present appeal has been filed against the judgment and award dated 05.03.2019 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sirohi in Motor Accident Claim Case No.40/2015 (Manju Devi V/s Rewaram & Ors.) whereby the claim petition filed by the respondent No.l-claimant was partly allowed and liability to make the payment of compensation was fastened upon the appellant.
6. The claim petition was filed by the respondent No.l-claimant Manju Devi on account of the grievous and simple injuries sustained by her in the accident which occurred on 23.05
The court established that valid fitness certificates are essential for determining liability in motor accident compensation cases.
The court established that delays in filing appeals can be condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act when justified, and that compensation in motor accident cases should reflect fair and adequat....
Compensation in motor accident cases must consider future prospects and conventional heads, with the multiplier reflecting the deceased's age, as per established guidelines.
Delay in lodging an FIR in motor accident claims does not negate the right to compensation if justified, and the assessment of compensation must be based on credible evidence of income and injuries.
The Motor Vehicles Act's amendment removing filing time limits for claims indicates that genuine cases should not be dismissed on procedural delays, reflecting Parliament's intent to support accident....
The injured-eye witness's testimony was sufficient to prove the negligence of the driver, and the delay in lodging the FIR was not a valid ground to reject the claim petition.
The main legal point established is the importance of verifying the validity of a driving license and considering evidence of income and future prospects in determining compensation in road accident ....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
