Ku.Sarswati v. Sandeep
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 s. 173
- MotorVehicles Act, 1988 s. 173
- Limitation Act, 1963 s. 5
- Motor Vehicies Act s. 166
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. Saraswati D/o Sunder Ku. Lal Satnami, aged about 24 years, R/o Sewtatola, Ward No.3 Dongergaon, District Rajnahdgaon (C.G.) S/o Sandeep Radheyshyam Maheshwari, aged about 32 years, (Driver) R/o Sadarline, Dongergaon, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) Rajesh S/o Harish Kumar Rathi, aged 34 years, R!o Basantpur, Ranjandgaon…
Judgment
Sinaie Bench : Hon'bleShriDiliD Raosaheb Deshmukh. J. M.A.(C.l No.963/2008 ARpellant (Claimant) Versus
Saraswati D/o Sunder Ku. Lal Satnami, aged about 24 years, R/o Sewtatola, Ward No.3 Dongergaon, District Rajnahdgaon (C.G.) S/o Sandeep Radheyshyam Maheshwari, aged about 32 years, (Driver) R/o Sadarline, Dongergaon, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) Rajesh S/o Harish Kumar Rathi, aged 34 years, R!o Basantpur, Ranjandgaon (C.G.) Jagdish Medical Stores, Rajnandgaon (C.G.) Registered Vehicle Ov/ner Scooter No.MP-24-EB-8538, The National Insurance Company Limited, Kamthee Line, Rajnandgaon (C.G.) Branch Manager, Appeal under Section 173'ofthe MotorVehicles Act, 1988 Present: Shri V. K. Sharma, counse! for the appeilant. (Passed on this 18th day of July, 2008) Heard on l,A.No.1, which is an appiication for condonation ofdeiay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. (2) For the reasons mentioned in the appiication, is (i.A.No.1) aiiowed and the delay in filing this appea! is condoned. (3) (4) Heard on admission. Impugned avi/ard dated 19-03-2008 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunai, Rajnandgaon in Ciaim Case No.137/2007 is pemsed. (5) in an accident that had occurred on 06-10-1997, Ku. Saraswati, who was minor at the time of accident, sustained injuries. F.I.R. was iodged on 08-10-1997. An application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicies Act for aranting compensation was filed before the Tribunal after '^M^^SS m a considerable delay of 9 years i.e., on 24-07-2006. Before the Tribynal, the claimant Kumari Saraswati admitted in cross-examination that she had sustained injuries due to an accident with a Tonga (a cart pulled by horses). On these grounds, the Tribunal held that culpable negligence on the part of the driver of Scooter bearing Registration No.MP-24-EB-8538 was not established. In my considered opinion, there is no illegality in the impugned award. (6) !n the resutt, there is no merit in this appeal which is accordingiy dismissed at the stage of admission. Dttip Ra ^a/- Judge 1 umane
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.