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

2000 Supreme(Ori) 138

P.K.MISRA
POWMEX STEEL LTD. – Appellant
Versus
GOPAL KRISHNA CHAND – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.K.Mohapatra, B.R.BARIK, UPENDRA KUMAR SAMAL

P. K. MISRA, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal has been filed by the owner under section 173 of the motor Vehicles Act, challenging the award of the Claims Tribunal directing payment of Rs. 1,00,000 as compensation to the claimant-respondent Nos. 1 and 2. A cross-objection has been filed by the claimants claiming higher compensation.

( 2 ) THE accident occurred on 9. 4. 1996. The claimants are the parents of deceased byomakesh who was a student of Plus II. The Claims Tribunal has found that the accident occurred due to negligent driving of the vehicle belonging to the present appellant.

( 3 ) THOUGH the learned counsel appearing for the appellant has challenged the finding regarding negligence of the driver of the vehicle, on a careful perusal of the judgment of the Tribunal as well as materials on record, such contention cannot be accepted. The finding is based on discussion of relevant materials on record. Moreover, the driver of the offending vehicle having not been examined, adverse inference is to be drawn against the owner/ insurance company.

( 4 ) THE next question relates to the quantum of compensation payable. Even though the appellant has challenged the quantum payable, it is appa




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