State of U. P. vs Sunita - 2023 Supreme(All) 2341

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(All) 2341

K. J. THAKER
State of U. P. – Appellant
Versus
Sunita – Respondent

Advocates appeared:
For the Appellants : P.K.Bisaria, SC.
For the Respondents: W.H.Khan, Poorva Agarwal, Punit Kumar Gupta, Puneet Kumar Gupta.

Table of Content
1. accident details and compensation awarded. (Para 2 , 3)
2. negligence determination requires factual evaluation. (Para 4)
3. negligence defined; drivers' responsibilities emphasized. (Para 5 , 6 , 7)
4. legal rights concerning motor vehicle accidents discussed. (Para 8 , 9)
5. burden of proof on defendants in accident claims. (Para 10 , 11)
6. tribunal's finding on negligence upheld. (Para 12 , 13)
7. compensation assessment and tribunal's decision affirmed. (Para 14)
8. appeal dismissal and order for compensation payment. (Para 15 , 16 , 17)

JUDGMENT

Kaushal Jayendra Thaker, J.

Heard Sri Saurav Srivastava, learned counsel for the State- appellants and Shri Puneet Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the claimant-respondents. Perused the record.

2. This appeal has been preferred by appellants against the judgment and award dated 09.02.1996 passed by Special Judge/Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Banda (hereinafter referred to as, 'Tribunal') in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.180/70 of 1992 of 2016 whereby the claimants were awarded compensation Rs.1,98,000/- with 12% per annum rate of interest.

3. The brief facts as culled out from the record are that on 20.05.1992, an accide

Click Here to Read the rest of this document