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

1967 Supreme(Mad) 365

K.VEERASWAMI
R. Selvaraj – Appellant
Versus
Jagannathan – Respondent


Advocates:
T.S. Rangarajan, for Petitioner.
P.C. Kurian, for Respondents.

ORDER.-

This petition is directed against an order of the City Civil Judge taking the view that the entire claim is triable only by the Claims Tribunal under the Motor Vehicles Act and that, as such, the Civil Court has no jurisdiction. On that view, it returned the petition for leave to sue in forma pauperis to the petitioner for presentation in the proper Court. The claim consisted of two items, (i) recovery of a sum of money as for personal injuries caused to the petitioner in the course of a motor accident, and (ii) recovery of another sum of money as damage to the cycle in the course of the accident. The Court below followed Om Prakash v. N.F. & G. Insurance Co.1, and arrived at the view that the civil Court will have no jurisdiction.

So far as the claim in respect of the personal injuries to the petitioner is concerned, the Court below was clearly right in the view it took. Sections 110(1) and 110-F of the Motor Vehicles Act make it crystal clear that claims for compensation in respect of accidents involving bodily injury are triable only by the Claims Tribunal having territorial jurisdiction and that the civil Court’s jurisdiction in respect of the matter is expressly ousted.







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