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

1987 Supreme(Ori) 133

S.C.MOHAPATRA
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. – Appellant
Versus
DURDADSHYA KUMAR – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
G.S.Das, N.C.PANIGRAHI, R.N.MOHANTY, S.P.Misra, S.S.BASU, S.S.RAO

S. C. MOHAPATRA, J.


( 1 ) INSURER is the appellant in this appeal under S. 110d of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (in short 'the Act' ). Cross-objection has been filed by the claimant for enhancement of the compensation.

( 2 ) IT is not in dispute that on 31-5-1980 at about 11 a. m. the truck bearing registration No. ORU 1220 caused the accident as a result of which the claimant sustained extensive injuries including fracture of right leg and ankle bones. He was removed to Kendrapara hospital where he was an indoor patient from the date of occurrence for long.

( 3 ) CASE of the claimant is that on account of accident he became invalid, sustained a loss of Rs. 600/- per month which he was earning. Accordingly, ho made a claim for compensation of Rs. 50,000/ -. The owner disputed the negligence in driving. It is his claim that the vehicle was requisitioned by the Collector for election duty and accordingly, he would not be liable to pay the compensation if at all it is awarded. The Collector, Cuttack, who requisitioned the vehicle did not appear in spite of valid service of notice and remained ex parte. The insurer claimed that under the terms of the policy it would not be liable to








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