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

1973 Supreme(MP) 50

S.P.BHARGAVA, R.J.BHAVE, S.R.VYAS
MANGILAL GANPAT – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA (UOI) – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
R.C.Mukati, R.K.Vijayavargi

R. J. BHAVE, J.

( 1 ) A Division Bench consisting of Honourable Justice Oza and Honourable Justice vyas has referred the following question for our decision, namely-"whether notice under Section 80, Civil P. C. is necessary for an application for compensation when filed under Section 110-A of the motor Vehicles Act before a Claims Tribunal constituted under the Act?"

( 2 ) THE facts of the case are that the appellant's daughter Rampyari Bai, aged about 12 years, was injured on 22nd November, 1966 as a result of a motor accident and subsequently died. The Motor Vehicle No. DD-4033 belonged to the defence Services of the Government of India. The appellant, therefore, preferred a claim under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act for grant of compensation against the driver of the motor vehicle as also the Union of India on the ground that the vehicle was driven by the driver rashly and negligently causing the accident. Amongst other grounds of defence, a plea was raised on behalf of the union of India that the claim was not tenable, as a notice under Section 80, Civil p. C. was not served on the Union of India. It may be noted at this stage that the name of the driver was deleted fro












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