SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next

SURENDRA SINGH (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. vs KRISHNA BATHAM - 2024-02-01

Subject :


SURENDRA SINGH (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. vs KRISHNA BATHAM

Supreme Today News Desk

O R D E R

Delay condoned.

2. Heard Mr. Shishir Kumar Saxena, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner(s).

3. The High Court has remanded the case to the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Gwalior limited for determination of the salary and the retirement age of the accidents victim – Chhunaram Batham, who died in the accident on 23.12.2006. The petitioner’s counsel would point out that in this case, the burden is fastened on the bus owner and the driver which caused the accident primarily on the ground that the license of the bus driver was invalid (expired) on the date of the accident. According to Mr. Saxena, although the driving license had expired on 03.11.2006, since renewal fee for the driving license was deposited on 22.12.2006, the bus driver should have been considered to have had valid license, on the date of the accident.

4. On the above aspect, the High Court noticed the fact that the renewal fee was deposited on 22.12.2006, by one Rajesh but there is no clarity on the identity of Rajesh. Moreover, long back the certificate dated 12.10.2015 (Annexure P7) was issued by the RTO, Gwalior to the wife of the bus owner and yet the said certificate was not produced and was kept by the petitioner for almost 3 years and was presented abruptly only when the case was to be heard on 10.01.2019. For this reason, the High Court opined that the bus owner who was absent before the MACT and made a last ditch attempt to produce the license renewal certificate, should not be granted any relief.

5. Having considered the basis for the view taken by the High Court and upon consideration of the submission made by the counsel for the petitioner and also by Mr. Mohan Babu Aggarwal, learned counsel appearing for insurance company, we see no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment. The Special Leave Petitions accordingly stand dismissed.

6. The sum of Rupees Ten Lakhs deposited by the petitioner in the Tribunal is made subject to the outcome of the final order to be passed by the MACT, upon the remand by the High Court.

7. Pending application(s), if any, stand closed.

(DEEPAK JOSHI) (KAMLESH RAWAT)

COURT MASTER (SH) ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

Breaking News

View All
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
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