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

2018 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 675

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH
Prashant Kumar Mishra, J
Insurance Company – Appellant
Versus
Claimants – Respondent


For the Appellants/Petitioners:[Names of Advocates]
For the Respondents:[Names of Advocates]

1. Since all the aforementioned four appeals arise out of the same accident which took place on 2.3.2012 causing death of two persons, namely, Rameshar alias Rameshwar and Toshan - lal, they are disposed of by this common order:

2. MAC Nos. 566 and 599 of 2013:
In these two appeals, one preferred by the insurance company and the other by the claimants, the award passed by the Claims Tribunal in Claim Case No. 42 of 2012 is under challenge. Insurance company has assailed its liability whereas the claimants have sought enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. These two appeals are for the death of Rameshar alias Rameshwar aged about 38 years at the relevant time. As per the pleadings taken in the claim case, when the deceased was going for labour work as usual in the offending vehicle, i.e., tractor - trolley bearing registration No. CG 05-8742-8743, its front wheel got separated and the offending vehicle fell into a pit ultimately resulting in the death of Rameshar.

3. Claim case was filed by the claimants who happen to be the wife, son, daughter and mother of the deceased claiming a compensation of Rs. 11,59,490, inter alia, pleading that the deceased was working as a



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