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

1994 Supreme(MP) 924

TEJ SHANKAR, U.L.BHAT
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Pratibha Rathi – Respondent


Advocates:
R.P. Johri for appellant.

ORDER

U.L. Bhat, C.J. -- 1. Bhagwandas Rathi sustained fatal injuries in a motor vehicle accident in 1987. His heirs filed a claim application before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal claiming Rs. 18,69,600/- as compensation from the owner and insurer of the vehicle. The owner and the insurer filed separate objections. The Tribunal held that the accident was a result of rash and negligent driving of the vehicle which was insured. The Tribunal passed an award for Rs. 2.5 lacs and directed the insurer to pay the same. The insurer has filed this appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded.

2. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant on the question of maintainability of appeal in the light of section 96 (2) of the Motor Vehicles Act 1939, corresponding to section 149 (2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

3. The provisions of the two Acts are almost identical. Sub-section (1) of section 96 states that if a judgment is obtained against the insurer, the insurer shall, subject to the provisions of section 96, pay to the person entitled to the benefit of the decree, any sum not exceeding the sum assured payable thereunder as also costs and interest, as if he were the ju





























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