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

1969 Supreme(MP) 39

G.L.OZA, V.R.NEWASKAR
HAYATKHAN – Appellant
Versus
MANGILAL – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
D.K.Jain, HARBANS SINGH

T. P. NAIK, J.

( 1 ) THIS is an appeal against an order of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. Indore, dismissing the appellant's application for compensation on a preliminary ground.

( 2 ) THE alleged accident took place on 29th September 1964 and the application for claim was filed on 2nd September 1965. The applicant-appellants contended that at the time of the accident they were minors and that the appellant No. 1 attained majority on 21st July 1965 and, therefore, he filed the claim petition within two months of the date of attainment of majority. On these grounds, the appellants prayed for condonation of delay.

( 3 ) THE learned Judge of the Claims Tribunal framed two preliminary issues, namely:-" 1. Whether the applicant No. 1 attained the age of majority on 21-71965? 2. If so, whether the applicants were prevented by sufficient cause from making the application in time?" in regard to the first issue, the learned Judge found in favour of the appellants. Regarding the other issue he came to the conclusion that Section 6 of the limitation Act. 1963, would not apply to the proceedings before him and, therefore, the appellant-applicants could not set the benefit of the provisio














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