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

2017 Supreme(P&H) 1090

AMIT RAWAL
Bijender – Appellant
Versus
Ranbir Singh – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Anil Kumar Gahlawat, Advocate.
Mr. Rajnish Malhotra, Advocate for the insurance company.

JUDGMENT :

AMIT RAWAL J.

1. The appeal has been preferred by major sons of the deceased- Balbir Singh, who died in a road accident occurred on 6.8.2011. The deceased along with one Prem Singh was travelling in an auto rickshaw bearing registration No.HR69-8120 driven by one Ajmer Singh and when they reached near Indo Arya in Hassangarh, a truck bearing registration No.HR38L-9067, driven rashly and negligently by respondent No.1, dashed against the aforesaid auto rickshaw, resulting into death of Balbir Singh and multiple grievous injuries to Prem Singh.

2. The Tribunal while assessing the compensation held that the claimants being major could not be said to be dependent upon father, therefore, there was no loss of dependency and awarded a compensation of Rs.50,000/- on account of “no fault liability” with interest @6% from the date of filing of the claim petition till its realization.

3. Mr. Gahlawat, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants submits that the claim petition was filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, therefore, the Tribunal grossly erred in awarding a compensation of Rs.50,000/- under “no fault liability”. It also committed illegality and pervers
























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