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

1996 Supreme(MP) 904

A.S.TRIPATHI, T.S.DOABIA
Hema Pandey – Appellant
Versus
Saroj Singh – Respondent


ORDER

A.S. Tripathi, J.

1. This appeal has been preferred against the order dated 2nd of March, 1993, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gwalior (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal), whereby the claim petition of the appellant was dismissed on the ground that it was beyond period of limitation.

2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the impugned order, it appears that the accident took place on 14th of April, 1988. The claim petition was presented on 21st of March, 1990. An objection was raised by the respondents that the claim petition of the appellant was beyond time, and therefore, the same could not be entertained.

3. The learned counsel for the appellant has argued that in claim cases there is no time limit. In this regard the learned counsel for the appellant has placed reliance in the case reported as Dhannalal v. D. P. Vijayvargiya and Ors., 1997(1) MPLJ 195, 1996 JLJ 528 (Supreme Court). The Apex Court in the above case has held that the provisions of section 166, sub-section 3 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, deleted by Amendment Act prescribing the limitation of filing claims before the Tribunal is proper. The Apex Court also held t


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