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

2006 Supreme(UK) 122

R.GUPTA, M.M.GHILDIYAL
Akhtar Alias Pappu – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttaranchal – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Rajeev Gupta, C.J.

1. Mr. Amrish Agarwal and Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocates for the petitioner.

Mr. N. C. Gupta, Standing Counsel for respondent No. 1,

Mr. B. D. Upadhyaya, Advocate for respondents Nos. 2 and 3.

They are heard.

2. Petitioner Akhtar @ Pappu has filed this writ petition for the following reliefs:

I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents Nos. 1 & 2 to pay the compensation of Rs. 15,48,000/- to the petitioner on account of death of his son caused by electric shock due to negligence of respondents.

II. Issue any other writ, order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

III. Award the cost of the writ petition to the petitioner throughout.

3. The learned Counsel for respondents Nos. 2 and 3 placing reliance on the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of SDO, Grid Corporation of Orissa Ltd. and Ors. vs. Timudu Oram has raised a preliminary objection about the maintainability of the writ petition.

4. In the case of SDO, Grid Corporation of Orissa Ltd. and Ors. vs. Timudu Oram (supra), the Apex Court, while considering the question of maintainability of a writ petition under






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