IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
B.R.MADHUSUDHAN RAO
Cheruvupalli Rajeshwari – Appellant
Versus
Depot Manager, APSRTC – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
B.R.MADHUSUDHAN RAO, J.
1.1 This appeal is filed under Section 173 of the MOTOR VEHICLES ACT by the claim petitioners arising out of an award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal–cum–The Court of the Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad (for short, ‘the Tribunal’) in MVOP.No.2074 of 2018 dated 18.07.2022, for enhancement of compensation.
MACMA.No.758 of 2022:
1.2 This appeal is filed under Section 173 of the MOTOR VEHICLES ACT by the respondents arising out of an award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal – cum – The Court of the Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad (for short, ‘the Tribunal’) in MVOP.No. 2074 of 2018 dated 18.07.2022, to set aside the impugned award.
2. For the sake of convenience, parties will be hereinafter referred to as the petitioners and the respondents.
3.1 Petitioners have filed MVOP under Section 166 of the MOTOR VEHICLES ACT , seeking compensation of Rs.35,00,000/- from the respondents jointly and severally with interest at the rate of 12% per annum on account of the death of one Cheruvupalli Venu, in a road traffic accident.
3.2 Petitioner No.1 is the wife, petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are the son and daughter, petitioner No
Magma General Insurance Company Vs. Nanu Ram Alias Chuhru Ram and others
Smt. Sarla Varma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation Sarla Varma
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.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.