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

2007 Supreme(MP) 1031

A.K.PATNAIK, A.M.SAPRE, S.K.SETH
DEVISINGH – Appellant
Versus
VIKRAMSINGH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
G.M.CHAPHEKAR, H.C.Jindal, M.Jindal, Manish Sujan, Shahid Sheikh

A. K. PATNAIK, C. J.

( 1 ) THE relevant facts leading to this reference are that one devisingh was a pillion rider on a motor cycle bearing registration No. MP-09-LF-1486 driven by Meharbansingh. The motor cycle met with an accident with a jeep bearing registration No. MP-09-W-2291 driven by vikramsingh. As a consequence of the acci-dent, the driver of the motor cycle as well as the two pillion riders on the motor cycle sustained injuries and they filed claim petitions under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act' ).

( 2 ) THE Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs. 1,95,100/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition in favour of Devisingh after holding that the negligence on the part of the jeep driver was 80% and the negligence on the part of the motor cycle driver was 20%. Aggrieved by the award, the United india Insurance Co. Ltd. filed M. A. No. 314/ 2007 and Devisingh filed M. A. No. 670/ 2007. When the appeals were heard by the division Bench, a contention was raised on behalf of the United India Insurance Co. that section 128 of the Act provides that no driver of a two wheeled motor cycle shall carry mor



















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