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

1991 Supreme(MP) 532

1992 JLJ 143
(FULL BENCH)
Dr. T.N. Singh, R.C. Lahoti and K.M. Pandey, JJ.
Gaya Prasad and others v. Suresh Kumar and others
Misc. Appeal No. 64 of 1991; Decided on 13.12.1991.

Advocates:
M.C. Jain and J.D. Suryavanshi for appellants; B.N. Malhotra amicus curiae.

Headnote:(1) Interpretation of Statutes -- provisions whether of ordinary law or of Constitution -- to be interpreted to effectuate the Directive Principles and not to defeat them.

       Provisions, whether of ordinary law or of the Constitution, are to be interpreted, it has been authoritatively held, to effectuate the Directive Principles and to ensure that those are not defeated.

       Purposive interpretation in a social amelioration legislation is an imperative irrespective of anything else. AIR 1978 SC 771, AIR 1983 SC 624, (1983) 1 A.E.R. 236, AIR 1980 SC 1789, AIR 1986 SC 1499, AIR 1987 SC 1454, AIR 1983 SC 2031 and AIR 1988 SC 1883 followed.

       [Para 7

       (2) Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 -- S.92 A -- Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 -- Ss. 140 and 141 (2) -- statutory innovation for payment of compensation even on the basis of ‘no fault liability‘ -- owes its origin to the judicial clamour raised at the highest level. AIR 1991 SC 1769 and AIR 1980 SC 1354 discussed. [Para 8

       (3) Constitution of India -- Art. 41 -- provisions of interim compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act -- have been inserted to prevent destitution of widows, Orphans and also permanently disabled victim of accident -- it is in order to fulfil the Constitutional imperative of this article -- adjudication of such claim is by summary procedure. AIR 1991 SC 1769 followed. 1988 JLJ 412 relied on. [Para 9

       Per Dr. T.N. Singh and K.M. Pandey, JJ. (R.C. Lahoti, J. contra) :

       (4) Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 -- Ss. 140, 141, 144, 168, 17, Chap. X and XII -- Constitution of India -- Art. 227 -- order of interim compensation under section 140 -- not appealable under section 173 -- if such order is passed arbitrarily High Court can give relief under Art. 227 of the Constitution.

       Section 144 of Chapter X imparts "overriding" effect to other provisions thereof, which are to prevail over "any other provisions of this Act or of any law for the time being in force". For good and valid reason; to achieve the pre-determined and paramount objective, the legislature took care to ensure that no order passed under Section 140 is taken in appeal and that is enforced instantly to reach the destitute immediately the relief granted. Pendency of such appeals in the High Court would interdict the "immediate" relief and frustrate the object of the order. Then the Tribunal refuses arbitrarily‘ to pass an order‘ under Section 140, the claimants would not be remediless. High Courts, where appeals under Section 173 are heard, possess supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution to give them due relief wilh greater expedition. [Para 10

       Though proviso to Section 168(1) clearly manifests legislative intent to treat the order passed under Section 140 as an interim order passed in the course of trial of the claim, it does carry also the implication that finality of that interim order is not impugnable under any provision of Chapter XII. Indeed, legislature‘s competence to make non-appealable any interim order is beyond dispute. AIR 1981 SC 1786, 1988 JLJ 86, AIR 1991 SC 1769, 1990 JLJ 386, 1991 ACJ 32, 1989 ACJ 1148 and 1983 ACJ 242 relied on. 1991 ACJ 73 distinguished. 1986 ACJ 202, 1989 ACJ 667 and 1990 ACJ 751 dissented from. 1989 ACJ 1129 overruled. [Paras 11 to 21

       Per K.M. Pandey, J.:

       (5) Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 -- Ss. 140, 141 and 173 -- order granting interim compensation under section 140 -- not appealable.

       If the Legislature intended to keep this matter of compensation beyond proof of the manner of accident, and fault liability of the person concerned, then it is unthinkable that the legislature intended to provide for an appeal against the compensation and make it a subject-matter of dispute. After all, appeal has to be provided for what when the liability has been fixed without fault and the amount of compensation has also been fixed and no evidence is permitted to be invited in this regard. It would be adding something in the mouth of the legislature if we say that the order passed under Section 140 is appealable. AJR 1991 SC 1769. followed. [Para 69

       Per RC. Lahoti, J. (contra) :

       (6) Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 -- Ss. 140, 168 (1) - proviso and 173 -- order under section 140 -- is definitely referable to section 168(1) as its proviso indicates -- it is part and parcel of the final award -- hence order passed under 5. 140 is appealable, under section 173.

       The proviso clearly indicates that an order under section 140 of the New Act is definitely referable to section 168(1) of the Act and is nothing but a part and parcel of an award to be finally made by the Tribunal. At times, an application for compensation might be disposed of finally with an order passed under section 140 of the Act itself which would be an award under section 168 too, appealable under section 173; the claim having been made solely on the basis of ‘no-fault liability‘ without reference to liability under the law of torts. 1990 JLJ 386, 1983 ACJ 242 and 1989 ACJ 1148 distinguished. 1989 ACJ 1129 held correctly decided. 1990 MPJR 578, 1986 ACJ 202, 1986 ACC 1137, 1985 ACJ 546 and 1990 ACJ 751 relied on. AJR 1988 SC 2010 and AJR 1970 SC 724 followed. [Paras 37 to 56

       Per Dr. T.N. Singh, J. (R.C. Lahoti and K.M. Pandey, JJ. agreeing) :

       (7) Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 -- Ss. 173 (1) - proviso, 217 and 173 -- award passed either under old Act or new Act-- appeal filed after enforcement of new Act i.e. on 1.7.1989 or thereafter -- procedure prescribed under section 173 (1) - proviso has to be followed -- deposit has to be made in accordance therewith.

       The clear intention of legislature to circumscribe the right of the appeal in all cases preferred after the new Act is manifested expressly and that intendment admits of no ambiguity. There is a weighty rationale of the new object to be fulfilled by the new provision embodied in the first proviso to Section 173 (1), leaving no scope for any ambiguity about legislative intent underlying the new provision. Frivolous appeals deserved to be curtailed and even otherwise, claimants‘ right deserved to be safeguarded by insisting on prior deposit of a part of the sum awarded which could be made available to the claimants by an interim order when the appeal is admitted. [Para 29

       The law applicable for the exercise of the right of appeal against "award" passed by MACT is the law in force on the date on which the appeal is preferred; the procedure prescribed under the new law would apply to the appeal to be preferred thereunder. We hold that to any appeal pending disposal on 1.7.1989, already preferred under Section 110 D (old), the provisions of Section 173 (new) would not apply, but, to any appeal preferred under the new provision, the old procedure which has been repealed would not apply. 1990 ACJ 309, (1969) 1 All E.R. 121, AIR 1990 All. 30, AIR 1957 SC 540, AIR 1971 SC 1193 and AIR 1969 SC 701 relied on. 1979 JLJ 730 and 1981 JLJ 171 overruled in 1990 JLJ 422. AIR 1953 SC 221, AIR 1958 SC 84, AIR 1960 SC 930, AIR 1965 SC 703, AIR 1968 SC 13, 1991 JLJ 490 and AIR 1982 SC 836 distinguished. AIR 1990 MP 354 overruled. [Para 31

       Per R.C. Lahoti, J.:

       (8) Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 -- S. 173 (1) proviso -- appeal preferred after the enforcement of new Act -- provisions under the new Act have to be followed

       U;k- MkW- Vh- ,u- flag ¼U;k- ds-,e- ikaMs lger½ %

       ¼1½ fof/k dk fuoZpu && lafo/kku vFkok lkekU; fof/k ds mcia/k && mudk fuoZpu funs‘kd rRoksa dks izHkko‘khy djus ds fy, u fd foQy djus ds fy, fd;k tkuk gksxkA

       ;g izkf/kdkjiw.kZ :i ls vfHkfu/kkZfjr fd;k x;k gS fd fd mica/kksa dk fuoZpu funs‘kd rRoksa dks izHkko‘khy djus ds fy, fd;k tkuk gksxk rFkk lqfuf‘pr djuk gksxk fd os foQy ugha gksrs gS && o lkekU; fof/k ds gksa vFkok lafo/kku dsA

       lkekftd lq/kkj fo/kku esa liz;kstu fuoZpu vU; dqN Hkh ls fujis{k ,d vo‘;dj.kh; gSA , vkb vkj 19787 ,l lh 771] , vkb vkj 1983 ,l lh 624] ¼1983½ 1 , vkb vkj 236] , vkb vkj 1980 ,l lh 1789] , vkb vkj 1986 ,l lh 1499] , vkb vkj 1987 ,l lh 1454 , vkb vkj 1983 ,l lh 2031 ,oa , vkb vkj 1988 ,llh 1883 vuqlfjrA

        ¿ in 7À

       ¼2½ eksVj ;ku vf/kfu;e] 1939 && /kkjk 92 ds && eksVj ;ku vf/kfu;e] 1988 && /kkjk 140 ,oa 141 ¼2½ *fcuk =qfV nkf;Ro* ds vk/kkj ij Hkh izfrdj ds lank; dk dkuwuh vfHkuo ifjorZu && mldh mRifÙk Lrj ij mBk, x, U;k;ky;hu fojks/k ds dkj.k gSA , vkj 1991 ,l lh 1769 ,oa , vkb vkj 1980 ,l lh 1354 foosfprA ¿ in 8À

       ¼3½ Hkkjr dk lafo/kku && vuq- 41 && eksVj ;ku vf/kfu;e ds v/khu varfje izfrdj ds mica/k && fo/kok] vukFk rFkk nq?kZVuk ds dkj.k LFkk;h :i ls fu%‘kDr O;fDr;ksa dh Hkh fujkfJrrk ds fuokj.k ds fy, var%LFkkfir fd, x, gS && ;g bl vuqPNsn ds lkafo/kkfud vo‘;dj.kh; dh iwfrZ ds fy, gS && ,sls nkos dk U;k;kfu.kZ;u laf{kIr izfØ;k }kjk gSA , vkb vkj 1991 ,l lh 1769 vuqlfjrA 1988 ts ,y ts 412 voyafcrA ¿ in 9À

       U;k- MkW Vh- ,u- flag ,oa U;k- ds-,e- ikaMs ¼U;k- vkj-lh- ykgksVh vlger½ %

       ¼4½ eksVj ;ku vf/kfu;e] 1939 && /kkjk 140] 141] 144] 168] 17] v/;k; 10 ,oa 12 && Hkkjr dk lafo/kku && vuq- 227 && /kkjk 140 ds v/khu varfje izfrdj dk vkns‘k &7 /kkjk 173 ds v/khu vihyuh; ugha gS && ;fn ,slk vkns‘k euekus rkSj ij ikfjr fd;k x;k gS rc mPp U;k;ky; lafo/kku ds vuqPNsn 227 ds v/khu vuqrks"k iznku dj ldrk gSA

       v/;k; 10 dh /kkjk 144 ml v/;k; ds vU; mica/kksa dks **v/;kjksgh** izHkko iznku djrh gS tks fd **bl vf/kfu;e ds vU; fdlh mica/k vFkok vU; fdlh Hkh rRle; izo`Ùk fof/k** ij vfHkHkkoh gksaxsA Bksl rFkk fof/kekU; dkj.k ls] iwoZ&vo/kkfjr rFkk loksZifj mÌs‘; dh iwfrZ ds fy,] fo/kku&eaMy us ;g lqfuf‘pr djus dk /;ku j[kk fd /kkjk 140 ds v/khu ikfjr dksbZ vkns‘k viby esa u ys tk;k tk, rFkk iznku fd;k x;k vuqrks"k fujkfJr rd rqjar igq¡pkus ds fy, og rRdky :i ls izHkkoh fd;k tk,A ,slh vihysa mPp U;k;ky; esa yafcr jgus ls **rqjar** vuqrks"k fu"ksf/kr gksxk rFkk vkns‘k dk mÌs‘; foQy gks tk,xkA tc vf/kdj.k /kkjk 140 ds v/khu vkns‘k ikfjr djus ls euekus rkSj ij bUdkj dj nsrk gS rc nkosnkj mipkj foghu ugha jgsxkA mPp U;k;ky;] tgk¡ 173 ds v/khu vibyksa dh lquokbZ dh tkrh gS] lafo/kku ds vuqPNsn 227 ds v/khu mUgsa vf/kd ‘kh?kzrk ls lE;d~ vuqrks"k nsus ds fy, i;Zos{k.k dby vf/kdkfjrk j[krs gSA ¿ in 10À

       ;|fi /kkjk 168 ¼1½ ds iajrqd }kjk /kkjk 140 ds v/khu ikfjr vkns‘k nkos ds fopkj.k ds vuqØe eas ikfjr varfje ekuk tkus dk fo/kk;h vk‘k; Li"Vr;k izdV gS] mlds lkFk ;g Hkh foof{kr gS fd ml varfje vkns‘k dh vafrerk v/;k; 12 ds fdlh Hkh mica/k ds v/khu vk{ksi ;ksX; ugha gSA vo‘; gh] dksbZ varfje vkns‘k vuihyh; cukus dh fo/kku&eaMy dh l{kerk fookn ls ijs gSA , vkb vkj 1981 ,l lh 1786] 1988 ts ,y ts 86] , vkb vkj 1991 ,l lh 1769] 1990 ts ,y ts 386] 1991 , lh ts 32] 1989 , lh ts 1148] ,oa 1983 , lh ts 424 voyafcrA 1991 , lh ts 73 izHksfnrA 1986 , lh ts 202] 1989 , lh ts 667 ,oa 1990 , lh ts 751 folEerA 1989 , lh ts 1129 myVk x;kA ¿ iSjk 11 ls 21À

       U;k ds-,e- ikaMs %

       ¼5½ eksVj ;ku vf/kfu;e] 1939 && /kkjk 140] 141] ,oa 173 && /kkjk 140 ds v/khu varfje izfrdj iznku djus okyk vkns‘k && vihyuh; ugha gSA

       ;fn fo/kku&eaMy dk vk‘k; izfrdj ds bl ekeys dks nq?kZVuk ds izdkj] rFkk lacaf/kr O;fDr ds =qfV nkf;Ro ds lcwr ls ijs j[kus dk Fkk] rc ;g dYiukrhr gS fd izfrdj ds fo#) viby micaf/kr dj mls fookn dh fo"k;oLrq cukuk fo/kku&eaMy dk vk‘k; FkkA varr%] tc nkf;Ro fcuk =qfV ds fu;r fd;k x;k gS rFkk izfrdj dh jde Hkh fu;r gS ,oa bl laca/k esa dksbZ Hkh lk{; vkeaf=r djuk vuqKkr ugha gS] rc vihy fdlfy, micaf/kr dh tk,A ;fn ge dgsa fd /kkjk 140 ds v/khu ikfjr vkns‘k vihyuh; gS] rc ;g fo/kku&eaMy ds ‘‘kCnksa esa dqN tksM+uk gks tk,xkA , vkb vkj 1991 ,l lh 1769 vuqlfjrA ¿ iSjk 69À

       U;k;ewfrZ Jh vkj-lh- ykgksVh ¼vlger½ %

       ¼6½ eksVj ;ku vf/kfu;e] 1939 && /kkjk 140] 168 ¼1½ && ijarqd rFkk 173 && /kkjk 140 ds v/khu viby && fuf‘pr :i ls /kkjk 168¼1½ dks funsZf‘kr fd, tkus ;ksX; gS tSlk fd mlds ijarqd }kjk minf‘kZr gS && og vafre vf/kfu.kZ; dk vfuok;Z vax gS && vr% /kkjk 140 ds v/khu ikfjr vkns‘k /kkjk 173 ds v/khu vihyuh; gSA

       ijarqd }kjk Li"Vr% minf‘kZr gS fd u, vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 140 ds v/khu vkns‘k fuf‘pr :i ls vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 168 ¼1½ dks funsZ‘k ;ksX; gS rFkk vf/kdj.k }kjk vafrer% fd, tkus okys vf/kfu.kZ; ds vfuok;Z vax ls vU; dqN ugha gSA dHkh&dHkh izfrdj ds fy, dksbZ vkosnu vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 140 ds gh v/khu ikfjr vkns‘k ds lkFk fuiVk;k tk ldrk gS tks fd /kkjk 173 ds v/khu vihyuh;] /kkjk 168 ds Hkh v/khu vf/kfu.kZ; gksxk && nkok] vi—R; fof/k ds v/khu nkf;Ro ls lanHkZ fcuk ek= *fcuk&=qfV nkf;Ro* ds vk/kkj ij gksus ds dkj.kA 1990 ts ,y ts 386] 1983 , lh ts 242 ,oa 1989 , lh ts 1148 izHksfnrA 1989 , lh ts 1129 Bhd fofuf‘pr vfHkfu/kkZfjrA 1990 ,e ih ts vkj 578] 1986 , lh ts 202] 1986 , lh lh 1137] 1985 , lh ts 546 ,oa 1990 , lh ts 751 voyafcrA , vkb vkj 1988 ,l lh 2010 ,oa , vkb vkj 1970 ,l lh 724 vuqlfjrA ¿ iSjk 37 ls 56À

       U;k- MkW Vh- ,u- flag ¼U;k- vkj- lh- ykgksVh ,oa ds- ,e- ikaMs lger½ %

       ¼7½ eksVj ;ku vf/kfu;e] 1939 && /kkjk 173¼1½ && ijarqd 217 ,oa 173 && iqjkus vf/kfu;e vFkok u, vf/kfu;e ds v/khu ikfjr vf/kfu.kZ; && vihy u, vf/kfu;e ds izorZu ds i‘pkr~ vFkkZr~ 1-7-1989 dks vFkok mlds i‘pkr~ Qkby dh xbZ && /kkjk 173¼1½& ijarqd ds v/khu foghr izfØ;k vuqlfjr dh tkuk pkfg, && fu{ksi mlds vuqlkj fd;k tkuk gksrk gSA

       fo/kku&eaMy dk] u, vf/kfu;e ds i‘pkr~ izLrqr dh xbZ lHkh ekeyksa esa vihy dk vf/kdkj ifjlhfer djus dk Li"V vk‘k; vfHkO;Dr :i ls izdV gS rFkk ml vk‘k; esa fdlh Hkh lafnX/kkFkZdrk dks LFkku ugha gSA u, mica/k ds ewyHkwr fo/kk;h vk‘k; ds laca/k esa lafnX/kkFkZdrk ds fy, dksbZ xqatkb‘k u NksM+rs gq,] /kkjk 173 ¼1½ ds izFke ijarqd esa lféfo"V u, mica/k }kjk iwfrZ fd, tkus okys u, mÌs‘; dk egRoiw.kZ rdkZ/kkj gSA lkjjfgr vibysa de dh tkus ;ksX; Fkh rFkk vU;Fkk Hkh] nkosnkjksa dk vf/kdkj vf/kfu.khZr jde ds ,d Hkkx ds iwfoZd fu{ksi ij cy nsdj tksfd vihy xzg.k dh tkus ij varfje vkns‘k }kjk nkosnkjksa dks miyC/k djk;k tk ldrk Fkk nkosnkjksa dk vf/kdkj lja{k.k ;ksX; FkkA ¿ iSjk 29À

       eksVj nq?kZVuk nkok vf/kdj.k }kjk ikfjr **vf/kfu.kZ;** ds fo#) viby ds vf/kdkj ds iz;ksx ds fy, ykxw gksus okyh fof/k viby izLrqr dh tkus okyh rkjh[k ij izo`Ùk fof/k gS( mlds v/khu izLrqr dh tkus okyh vihy ij ubZ fof/k ds v/khu fofgr izfØ;k ykxw gksxh ge vfHkfu/kkZfjr djrs gS fd 1-7-1989 ij fuiVk, tkus ds fy, yafcr vihy ij] tksfd /kkjk 110 ?k ¼iqjkuh½ ds v/khu igys gh izLrqr dh xbZ gS] /kkjk 173 ¼ubZ½ ds mica/k ykxw ugha gksaxs( fdarq u, mica/k ds v/khu izLrqr fdlh vihy ij] iqjkuh izfØ;k tks fujflr dh tk pqdh gS ykxw ugha gksxhA 1990 , lh ts 309] ¼1969½ 1 vky bZ vkj 121] , vkb vkj 1990 bykgkckn 30] , vkb vkj 1957 ,l lh 540] , vkb vkj 1971 ,l lh 1193 rFkk , vkb vkj 1969 ,l lh 701 voyafcrA 1979 ts ,y ts 730 rFkk rFkk 1981 ts ,y ts 171] 1990 ts ,y ts 422 esa myVs x,A , vkb vkj 1953 ,l lh 221] , vkb vkj 1958 ,l lh 84] , vkb vkj 1960 ,l lh 930] , vkb vkj 1965 ,l lh 703] , vkb vkj 1968 ,l lh 13] 1991 ts ,y ts 490 rFkk , vkb vkj 1982 ,l lh 836 izHksfnrA , vkb vkj 1990 e-iz- 354 myVk x;kA ¿ iSjk 3À

       U;k- MkW Vh- ,u- flag ¼U;k- vkj-lh- ykgksVh ,oa ds-,e- ikaMs lger½ %

       ¼8½ eksVj ;ku vf/kfu;e] 1988 && /kkjk 173¼1½ && ijarqd && u, vf/kfu;e ds izorZu ds i‘pkr~ izLrqr vihy && u, vf/kfu;e ds v/khu mica/k vuqlfjr fd, tkus gksaxs && fu{ksi dh ‘krZ && vihy dk vf/kdkj ladh.kZ {kh.k djs ,slh nqHkZj ugha gSA , vkb vkj 1988 ,l lh 2010 rFkk , vkb vkj 1970 ,l lh 724 vuqlfjrA ¿ iSjk 54 rFkk 55À

ORDER

Dr. T.N. Singh, J. -- 1. For this Bench's opinion are referred, in two separate matters, the following two questions :

M.A. 64 of 1991 :

Whether the Insurer and/or the owner/driver of the offending motor vehicle or vehicles against whom an order of compensation is passed in terms of the provisions of Section 140, Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has a right of appeal against that order under Section 173 of the Act?

M.M. No. 138 of 1991 :

Whether any appeal filed on or After 1.7.1989, challenging an order of compensation passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal in terms of provisions of Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act or the final award passed under Section 168 of the Act, can be entertained without the appellant fulfilling the requirement of the provisions contained in Section 173 of the Act of making requisite deposit of the sum contemplated thereunder? Hereinafter, the above questions would be referred to as the first and second question respectively.

2. Parties and also facts of the two matters are different, but for the sake of convenience, we are treating them analogous for answering the questions of law above-referred, both involving the same exercise of interpretation of Section 173, Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, for short, the 'Act'. Indeed, another common feature of the two matters is that orders for interim compensation passed under Section 140 of the Act by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (for short, the MACT) are challenged in the two appeals preferred under Section 173.

3. Appellants in M.A. No. 64/91 are owners of a bus bearing registration No. CPJ 8342, said to be involved in an accident on 24.3.1988 in which the claimant/respondent is found to have been seriously injured. On 18.2.1991, MACT, Bhind passed the impugned order against the owners for payment to the claimant of interim compensation of Rs. 7,500/- after recording the finding that particulars of the Insurer could not be ascertained. In the appeal, the two-fold plea disputes identity of the vehicle involved in the accident and the fact of the claimant suffering permanent disability. When the matter came up for hearing on admission before the learned Single Judge, he took the view that the question of appeal's maintainability deserved consideration and decision of a Larger Bench because it was necessary to examine the correctness of the view expressed in this Court's D.E. decision in Oriental Insurance Co. v. Pritamlal, 1989 ACJ 1129. As such, the respondent was not noticed but when this Bench heard the matter, we requested Shri B.N. Malhotra, Advocate, to assist the Court as amicus curiae. We heard appellants' counsel Shri M. C. Jain, but allowed Shri Malhotra time to file written arguments which have come on record and are perused.

4. In the other matter, the Insurer is the appellant and in that appeal too, in another form, the question of maintainability arises. It was contended by appellant's counsel that though the appeal was preferred under Section 173 of the Act, the accident having taken place on 8.2.1985, prior to enforcement of the new Act, the appellant was not required to make the deposit contemplated under the proviso to Section 173 (1). He had relied on this Court's D.E. decision in Jaswantrao v. Kamlabai (AIR 1990 MP 354) to support his contention which did not appeal to the Referring Judge. That decision he found amenable to reconsideration on its substratum being shaken by this Court's subsequent Full Bench decision in Babulal's case (1990 JLJ 422 = AIR 1990 MP 317). Under the impugned order, passed on 29.11.1990, by MACT, Morena, for death of Shrichand, his widow (claimant/respondent No.1) and two sons (claimants/respondents 2 and 3) are held entitled to be paid Rs. 15,000/-. There is a finding recorded in the, impugned order that in the accident, two vehicles are involved: Truck No. CPM 9485, owned by respondent No.4, Virendra Pal Singh; and Tractor No. RNT 347, owned jointly by respondents 7 and 8, Bharat Singh and Bhagwan Singh. Both insurers






















































































































































































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 Back to top