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

2019 Supreme(Telangana) 328

T.AMARNATH GOUD
D. Geetha – Appellant
Versus
P. Jaipal Reddy – Respondent


JUDGMENT :

Appellants in former appeal (MACMA No.1232 of 2012) laid a claim petition in O.S.No.1657 of 2006 on the file of the V Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge (Mahila Court) - cum - XIX Addl. Chief Judge, City Criminal Courts at Hyderabad, under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short ‘Act’) seeking a compensation of Rs.6,00,000/- (Rupees Six Lakhs only) for the death of D. Krishna, who is father of appellant Nos.1 to 3 and son-in-law of appellant No.4, while the very same appellants being appellants in latter appeal (MACMA No.3545 of 2012) filed separate claim petition in O.P. No.1658of 2006 on the file of the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal - cum - XII Additional Judge (Fast Track Court), City Civil Court, Hyderabad, under Section 166 of the Act, seeking a compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Only) for death of D. Malleshwari, who is mother of appellant Nos.1 to 3 and daughter of appellant No.4.

2. Since parties, date of accident and crime vehicle in both the appeals are one and the same except the orders that were passed by different Tribunal, both these appeals are being disposed of by way of a common judgment.

3. Aggrieved by the order

      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