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

1987 Supreme(Ori) 92

G.B.PATTANAIK
KAMALA – Appellant
Versus
SASADHAR – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
MOHITOSH SINHA, N.SENGUPTA, P.K.MISHRA, P.ROY, S.K.GHOSH

G. B. PATTANAIK, J.


( 1 ) THIS is an appeal under S. 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act against the order of the Second Motor Accidents the Claims Tribunal rejecting the claim of the appellant. The appellant filed an application claiming compensation on account of the death of her husband Ratnakar Behera and it was alleged in the application that the death occurred on account of the accident caused by Bus No. ORD 3521 at 10 a. m. at Cuttack-Sambalpur National Highway. In the prescribed form provided for under the relevant Rules as against Column 18, the appellant gave her name and address and as against column 22 which provides for the names of other legal representatives of the injured and their relationship, no mention was made, but in Column 23, where any other information that may be necessary or helpful for disposal of the claim is to be given, it is mentioned "separate sheet attached" and in that sheet it has been clearly stated that the deceased had four sons and two daughters. Rest of the facts in the separate sheet are not necessary to be discussed in view of the points arising for consideration. After the application was admitted for enquiry and notice was issued, the owner










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