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

1962 Supreme(P&H) 90

HARBANS SINGH
Sardara Singh Narinjan Singh – Appellant
Versus
Sub Divisional Officer, Chandpur – Respondent


Judgment

Harbans Singh, J.

1. Facts giving rise to these Firs-Appeals from Order may briefly be stated as follows: The work of lining of Nangal Hydel Channel was given on contract basis to a number of contractors. Certain portions of the canal were entrusted to each one of the various contractors. The portion between ED 157375 and 157500 warwith M/s. Sardara Singh Niranjan Singh, On 12th of May, 1954, at about 8.30 a. in. G. M. C. (sic) No. PNE 3569 loaded with bajri was going along the ramp leading to the canal bank when its power failed and it began to go dowp the slop-of the ramp. It got out of control and ultimately overturned resulting in serious injuries to two of the labourers employed on the truck. The injured werei removed to the hospital and the matter was reported to the Sub-Divisional Officer wh(sic) sent a report to the police. It was found by the police to be a mere accident.

Under the Workmens Compensation Act Rs. 2,016/- were paid by the State Govt. to Meha-Singh and Rs. 1,680/- to Tarsem Singh in respect of the injuries suffered by them. Under Sub-section (2) of Section 12 the Government, after having paid the amount, as the principal, claimed to be indemnified by t




















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