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

2023 Supreme(All) 2389

SARAL SRIVASTAVA
Vijay Singh – Appellant
Versus
Vth Additional D. J. – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant : Sanjay Mishra
For the Respondent: Syed Ali Murtza

Table of Content
1. accident caused by truck's driver's negligence. (Para 2 , 3)
2. burden of proof lies with respondents to establish appellant's negligence. (Para 4 , 5)
3. proving injuries and liability remains paramount for compensation. (Para 6 , 7 , 8)
4. court affirms proposed compensation is just and reasonable. (Para 9 , 10)
5. insurance company mandated to pay compensation promptly. (Para 11)

JUDGMENT

Saral Srivastava, J.

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The present appeal has been filed against the award dated 05.12.1998 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kanpur Nagar (hereinafter referred to as 'tribunal') in MAC No.196 of 1992, whereby the the tribunal has rejected the claim petition instituted by claimant/appellant.

3. Challenging the award, learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the finding of the tribunal that the accident had taken place due to rash and negligent driving of claimant/appellant is perverse and against the record. It is submitted that the claimant/appellant was driving a maruti car No.UGR/6031 which met with an accident with offending truck No.MKW/9594. It is submitted that it was a spec

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