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

2025 Supreme(P&H) 1244

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
SUDEEPTI SHARMA
Raj Bala – Appellant
Versus
Hardeep Singh – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Parminder Singh, Advocate

JUDGMENT :

Sudeepti Sharma, J.

1. The present appeal has been preferred against the award dated 13.03.2007 passed in the claim petition bearing No. MACT No.72-T dated 12.03.2004 filed by the appellants/claimants under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Patiala (for short, 'the Tribunal') for enhancement of compensation granted to the appellants/claimants to the tune of Rs.25,00,000/-, on account of death of Ajay Bansal, in a motor vehicular accident, which occurred on 14.11.2003.

2. As sole issue for determination in the present appeal is confined to quantum of compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal, a detailed narration of the facts of the case is not reproduced and is skipped herein for the sake of brevity.

3. On the last date of hearing following order was passed:-

'On the last date of hearing, Registry was directed to inform the respondents as well as counsel. The report of the Registry is as under:-

Respondent No. 1 refused to accept the notice and affixation is made.

Respondent No. 2 is residing at Patiala with his son, address not known. '

Since respondent No.l did not accept notice and affixation is made, therefore, he i

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