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

2016 Supreme(HP) 2191

MANSOOR AHMAD MIR
Karnail Singh – Appellant
Versus
Rattan Lal Gujjar – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Rajan Kahol, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Mr. S.D. Gill, Advocate

JUDGMENT :

Mansoor Ahmad Mir, J.

This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 19.6.2010, made by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (1), Kangra at Dharamshala, H.P. in MACP No. 45-N/II- 2007, titled Sh. Karnail Singh and another versus Rattan Lal and others, for short “the Tribunal”, whereby compensation to the tune of Rs.50,000/- under “no fault liability” was granted in favour of the claimants alongwith interest @ 9% per annum, with Rs.2000/- as costs, hereinafter referred to as “the impugned award”, for short.

2. Claimants have questioned the impugned award on the grounds that the tribunal has fallen in an error in recording the findings on issues No. 1 and 2.

3. Driver, owner and insurer have not questioned the impugned award on any ground, has attained the finality, so far as it relates to them.

4. The only question to be determined in this appeal is- whether the findings recorded on issues No. 1 and 2 are legally correct or otherwise?

5. I am of the considered view that the findings recorded on issues No. 1 and 2 are legally incorrect, for the following reasons

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