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

1996 Supreme(MP) 50

S.B.SAKRIKAR, A.K.TIWARI
Nagindas – Appellant
Versus
Nasir Ali – Respondent


JUDGMENT

S.B. Sakrikar, J.

1. The appellants/ claimants have preferred the aforesaid Letters Patent Appeals under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent, against the common order dated 31.7.1990 passed by the learned single Judge of this Court in Misc. Appeal No. 198 of 1988, thereby dismissing the Misc. Appeal Nos. 198 and 203 of 1988 and holding the respondent No. 3, National Insurance Co. Ltd. and the original registered owner of the auto-rickshaw, respondent No. 4 not liable to pay the compensation.

2. The facts lie in a narrow compass that both the appellants filed separate claim petitions before the V Additional M.A.C.T. at Indore with regard to the injuries caused to them in the accident occurred on 20.5.1979 due to rash and negligent driving of the autorickshaw bearing registration No. MPF 8835. In the claim petitions, it was alleged that on the date of the accident, respondent No. 1, Nasir Ali was the owner of the autorickshaw and respondent No. 4, Jagdeesh Kumar was the registered owner. Respondent No. 2, Vijay Kumar was the driver of the autorickshaw at the relevant time on behalf of respondent No. 1, Nasir Ali. The autorickshaw was insured with respondent No. 3, insurance company


























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