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

2018 Supreme(P&H) 2337

B.S.WALIA
Parveen – Appellant
Versus
Prince – Respondent


Advocates:
Ms. Sharmila Sharma, Advocate for the appellants

JUDGMENT

Mr. B.S. Walia, J. (Oral):- CM No.3479-CII of 2018 -

For the reasons as are mentioned in the application, the same is allowed. Delay of 39 days in late filing of the appeal is condoned subject to all just exceptions.

CM No.14050-CII of 2018

For the reasons as are mentioned in the application, the same is allowed and copy of Mechanical Report, Annexure A-4 is taken on record.

Main Case

Challenge in the instant appeal is to the grant of recovery rights to the Insurance Company against the appellants i.e. owner-cum-driver of the offending vehicle. The case as set up by the appellant was that a FIR was registered by the father of injured respondent No.1 i.e. (PW-1) mentioning registration number of the offending tractor as HR 42C – 1389, but, subsequently a supplementary statement (Ex.P-92) was made on 19.01.2017 implicating the appellants by giving their tractor number i.e.HR 42B – 9985.

2. The Learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sonipat (‘Tribunal’ – for short) held that the eye-witness account of the claimant on oath by way of supplementary statement (Ex.P-92) before the Police on 19.01.2017 giving the number of the offending tractor i.e. HR 42B – 9985 owned by the appel





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