Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD – Appellant
Versus
GURLEEN KAUR AND OTHERS – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J.
FAO-665-2024 (O&M)
1. The present appeal has been preferred against the award dated 28.11.2023 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Patiala (for short, 'the Tribunal’) in the claim petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 on the ground that the liability to pay compensation to the tune of Rs. 38,43,000/- has been wrongly fixed upon the appellant-Insurance Company.
XOBJC-27-2026
2. The present cross-objection has been preferred by cross-objector/claimants against the 28.11.2023 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Patiala in the claim petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, for enhancement of compensation, granted to the claimants to the tune of Rs.38,43,000/- along with interest @ 7.5% per annum on account of death of Gagandeep Singh who died in road accident, which occurred on 12.04.2019.
3. Since the appeal filed by the Insurance Company and the cross- objections filed by the cross-objectors/legal heirs of the claimant are arising out of the same award dated 28.11.2023 passed by the learned Tribunal, therefore, FAO-665-2024 and XOBJC-27-2026 are decided vide this common ju
The court established that negligence in motor vehicle accidents must be proven by evidence, and the failure to consider eyewitness accounts can lead to an unjust dismissal of claims.
Rash and negligent driving is sine qua non for maintaining claim petition seeking compensation in terms of provisions of Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act held that plea of negligence set up by claim....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
