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

1990 Supreme(MP) 116

B.C.VARMA
MOHAMMAD ILIAS – Appellant
Versus
BODHANI BAI – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
H.B.AGRAWAL, K.S.VADHVA

B. C. VARMA, J.

( 1 ) THIS revision arises out of the order dated 29-4-1987, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur, in Claims Case No. 92 of 1986. By that order, the Claims Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 15,000/- under Sec. 92-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, in favour of the claimants (non-applicants Nos. 1 to 6 ). However, on observation that the deceased was unauthorisedly travelling in the truck, the Insurance Company has been exonerated from discharging this liability.

( 2 ) THE contention of the truck-owner, who has preferred this revision is that the Insurance Company should also have been jointly made liable under Section 92-A.

( 3 ) HAVING heard counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that the contention is well-founded and the revision must be allowed. Section 92-A of the Motor Vehicles Act is as follows: - "92-A. Liability to pay compensation in certain cases on the principle of no fault.- (1) Where the death or permanent disablement of any person has resulted from an accident arising out of the use of a motor vehicle or motor vehicles, the owner of the vehicle shall, or, as the case may be, the owner of the vehicles shall, jointly and severally, be l








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