Back
NUPUR BHATI
Jubeda Wd/o Late Sikandar Khan – Appellant
Versus
Pawandeep Singh S/o Shri Jasvinder Singh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
NUPUR BHATI, J.
1. The civil misc. appeal nos. 3367/2017, 3371/2017 and 3372/2017 have been preferred by the appellant-Insurance Company under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter as ‘the Act’) assailing the judgment and award dated 22.06.2017 passed by learned Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jodhpur Mahanagar (hereinafter as ‘the learned Tribunal’) in MAC Case Nos. 13/2015, 15/2015 and 14/2015 and whereby the learned Tribunal partly allowed the claim petitions filed by the respective claimants under Section 166 of the MV Act and awarded compensation of Rs. 72,04,298/- or Rs. 12,70,360/- and Rs. 61,20,455/- respectively in favour of respective claimants along with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of filing the respective claim petitions, while fastening the liability upon the respondent/owner and respondent/driver of the offending vehicle along with the appellant/Insurance Company, jointly and severally.
2. The S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal Nos. 2666/2017, 2665/2017 and 2667/2017, seeking enhancement, have been filed by the respective respondents/claimants assailing the judgment and award dated 22.06.2017 passed by the learned Tribunal in MAC Case Nos.
The court upheld the tribunal's findings on negligence and modified compensation amounts, emphasizing the standard of proof in negligence claims and the admissibility of police documents.
The court established that the burden of proof in negligence claims is on the claimants, requiring only a preponderance of probability to establish liability.
Rash and negligent driving is sine qua non for maintaining claim petition seeking compensation in terms of provisions of Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act held that plea of negligence set up by claim....
The court adjusted the compensation for fatal accident claims based on the deceased's income and future prospects, emphasizing a holistic approach to negligence and entitlement under the Motor Vehicl....
The court ruled that contributory negligence cannot be inferred solely from a site plan when eyewitness testimony indicates no fault, and clarified compensation calculations regarding deductions and ....
In motor accident claims, negligence should be evaluated based on the preponderance of probabilities, and compensation must be just and reflective of loss, including future prospects.
The court established that the driver of a stationary vehicle is solely liable for accidents due to improper parking without indicators, impacting compensation calculations.
The court established that in motor accident claims, the burden of proof lies with the claimants, and compensation must be assessed based on reliable income documentation.
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
