Back
SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA
Sada Kanwar – Appellant
Versus
Hanuman Sahay – Respondent
ORDER
1. This is the civil misc. appeal filed against the order passed by the Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation Act, Sikar whereby the claim petition has been dismissed on the ground that the claimants had filed earlier claim petition before MACT, Alwar and claimants cannot file a claim petition at two different forums at a given point of time.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants points out that the claim petition filed by the appellants before MACT, Alwar was erroneous as MACT, Alwar did not have territorial jurisdiction and he points out further that the claim filed by the appellants before the MACT, Alwar has been rejected vide order dated 23.03.2004 and this fact has been noticed by the learned Commissioner, MACT and in view thereof, he could not have rejected the claim of the appellants filed under the WCC on the ground of choosing two different forums. Learned counsel has relied on the judgment passed by the court in The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Versus Smt. Bidami & Ors. reported in WLC (Raj.) 2010 (1) 440 wherein it was so held.
3. Learned counsel further submits that the question of limitation could also have not arisen as there is no limitation provided for
Claimants can pursue compensation claims in different forums without being barred by prior dismissals based on jurisdictional grounds.
The jurisdiction of the Claims Tribunal extends beyond technical territorial limits, provided that no failure of justice occurs, allowing compensation claims even if they arise outside traditional ju....
Under Section 167 of the Motor Vehicles Act, claimants can only pursue compensation under either the Motor Vehicles Act or the Workmen Compensation Act, not both for the same incident.
The central legal point established is that the jurisdiction of the Tribunal to hear a claim petition under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is determined by the residence of the claimant and the locatio....
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the provisions of Section 166(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act should be interpreted in a manner consistent with facilitating remedies for the ....
The court established that claim petitions under the Motor Vehicles Act can be filed in jurisdictions where the insurer has a business presence, promoting access to justice for claimants.
The interpretation of territorial jurisdiction under the Motor Vehicles Act should consider the presence of the insurer's office within the jurisdiction, and the Act should be interpreted in a manner....
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal in the district where the accident occurred or where the claimant resides has jurisdiction to entertain t....
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
