Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA, GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR
CHOLAMANDALAM MS. GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. – Appellant
Versus
MANGALLI AGAMAIAH AND 4 OTHERS – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. circumstances leading to the accident. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 2. claimants' assertions regarding loss. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. appellant's defense and contentions. (Para 8 , 20 , 21) |
| 4. tribunal's findings on liability and compensation. (Para 14 , 18 , 19) |
| 5. guiding legal principles on compensation. (Para 25 , 26 , 30) |
| 6. final order sustaining compensation. (Para 31 , 32) |
JUDGMENT :
Gadi Praveen Kumar, J.
We have heard Sri A.Ramakrishna Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Sri Yara Shiva Kumar, learned counsel representing Sri A.S.Narayana, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2.
2. The present MACMA is filed by Insurance Company being aggrieved by the order dated 28.03.2017 passed in M.V.O.P.No.1615 of 2011 by the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-XIV Additional Chief Judge (Fast Track Court), City Civil Courts, Hyderabad (for Short ‘the Tribunal’) insofar as allowing the claim of the claimants granting compensation of Rs.27,86,500/- along with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of the petition to till the date of deposit with proportionate costs, as arbitrary.
3. The facts leading to the filing of MVOP before the learned Tribunal are that on 04
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
