Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Judgments

Recent judgments citing this act

1. The New India Assurance Company Ltd. vs Sri Papitla Muthaiah @ Yesu on 07 November, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana7 Nov 2023

   Case Name: The New India Assurance Company Ltd. vs Sri Papitla Muthaiah @ Yesu on 07 November, 2023 Court: High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 07 November, 2023 Bench: P. Sam Koshy J and N. Tukaramji J Subject: Motor Vehicle Accident Claim Key Legal Propositions 1. Appeals under Section 13 of the Motor Vehicles Act can be withdrawn with the consent of parties. 2. Settlement reached before a Lok Adalat is binding and confirms the award passed by the Tribunal. 3. Withdrawal of an appeal results in its dismissal, with no order as to costs. Judgment Summary Background: The present appeal was filed by the Insurance Company against an award dated 03.08.2015 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Additional District Judge, Khammam, in M.V.O.P.No.371 of 2011. Concurrent petitions for condonation of delay and stay of proceedings were also filed. Held: A. On Appeal Withdrawal: Majority View: The appeal was withdrawn by the Insurance Company following a settlement reached before the Lok Adalat on 09.09.2023. The Lok Adalat award was confirmed, and the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn. Dissenting View: None. B. On Costs: Majority View: There was no order

2. T.Dattatri vs Kamle Santhosh & United India Insurance Company Ltd. on 13 February, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana13 Feb 2023

   Case Name: T.Dattatri vs Kamle Santhosh & United India Insurance Company Ltd. on 13 February, 2023 Court: High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 13 February, 2023 Bench: Justice Lalitha Kanneganti Subject: Motor Vehicle Accident Claim – Discrepancy in Vehicle Number & Fraudulent Claim Key Legal Propositions 1. Discrepancy in vehicle number mentioned in FIR/charge sheet and insurance policy is a valid ground for dismissing a claim petition. 2. Submission of a disability certificate when no disability was claimed in the petition raises serious doubts about the genuineness of the claim. 3. Courts are justified in dismissing claims where discrepancies and potentially fraudulent evidence are presented. Judgment Summary Background: This appeal arises from the dismissal of a claim petition (OP No. 198 of 2005) by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Adilabad. The claimant, T. Dattatri, sought compensation for injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident on 18.09.2004, alleging rash and negligent driving. The Tribunal dismissed the claim due to discrepancies in the auto number provided and the evidence presented. Held: A. On Issue of Discrepancy in Vehicle Number:

3. L. Manemma & Anr. vs. K. Mohan Reddy & Anr. on 09 June, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana9 Jun 2023

   Case Name: L. Manemma & Anr. vs. K. Mohan Reddy & Anr. on 09 June, 2023 Court: High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 09 June, 2023 Bench: Smt. Justice Lalitha Kanneganti Subject: Motor Vehicle Accident Claim – Quantum of Compensation – Admissibility of Salary Certificate – Examination of Issuing Authority. Key Legal Propositions 1. The authenticity of a salary certificate (Ex.A4) submitted as evidence of the deceased’s income, requires examination of the issuing authority or drawing officer, particularly when no specific proof of monthly salary exists. 2. An objection to a document’s admissibility must be raised at the time of its introduction; a belated objection is not tenable. 3. The Tribunal erred in not considering the salary certificate (Ex.A4) and instead relying on a notional income, leading to inadequate compensation. Judgment Summary Background: This Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal (MACMA) arises from a claim for compensation following the death of L. Ramachandra Reddy in a road accident. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) awarded Rs. 1,34,500/-. The appellants (claimants) contend that the MACT failed to properly consider the dec

4. The APSRTC vs Chelimela Kummari Satyanarayana on 17 March, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana17 Mar 2023

   Case Name: The APSRTC vs Chelimela Kummari Satyanarayana on 17 March, 2023 Court: High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 17 March, 2023 Bench: Smt. Justice Lalitha Kanneganti Subject: Motor Vehicle Accident Claim – Enhancement of Compensation Key Legal Propositions 1. Determination of appropriate monthly income of a claimant in motor accident claim cases, considering the nature of occupation. 2. Assessment of disability percentage based on medical evidence and its impact on the claimant’s ability to work. 3. Calculation of loss of future income considering age, future prospects, and applicable multiplier in motor accident claim cases. Judgment Summary Background: Two Motor Accident Miscellaneous Appeals (MACMAs) arose from a common award dated 18.07.2011 in O.P. No. 2875 of 2008. MACMA No. 739 of 2012 was filed by the APSRTC challenging the award, while MACMA No. 444 of 2014 was filed by the claimant, Chelimela Kummari Satyanarayana, seeking enhancement of compensation. The claim petition stemmed from injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident. Held: A. On Issue of Monthly Income: Majority View: The Court inclined to consider the claimant’s submitted m

5. United India Insurance Co Ltd vs Vojjala Kumar on 09 February, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana9 Feb 2023

   Case Name: United India Insurance Co Ltd vs Vojjala Kumar on 09 February, 2023 Court: High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 09 February, 2023 Bench: Justice Pulla Karthik Subject: Motor Vehicle Accident Claim – Compensation – Assessment of Loss of Earnings and Pain & Suffering. Key Legal Propositions 1. The assessment of loss of earnings based on a percentage of physical disability, coupled with the claimant’s income and an appropriate multiplier, is legally sound. 2. Awarding compensation for pain and suffering, considering the severity of injuries, multiple surgeries, and prolonged treatment, is justifiable. 3. The Tribunal’s decision to award compensation based on evidence and material on record, without any demonstrable error, warrants affirmation. Judgment Summary Background: This appeal arises from a Motor Accident Claims Petition (MACP) wherein the claimant sought compensation for injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident on 19.11.2004. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (MACT) awarded Rs. 4,00,000/- to the claimant. The Insurance Company, being the appellant, challenges the award, specifically contesting the assessment of loss of earnings and t

6. The New India Assurance Company Ltd. vs. Smt. Neena Ragamayee & others on 18 April, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana18 Apr 2023

   Case Name: The New India Assurance Company Ltd. vs. Smt. Neena Ragamayee & others on 18 April, 2023 Court: High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 18 April, 2023 Bench: Justice Lalitha Kanneganti Subject: Motor Vehicle Accident Claim Key Legal Propositions 1. Liability of insurance company is established when connected appeals have already held the company liable. 2. Compensation can be enhanced considering grievous injuries, medical expenses, loss of income, pain and suffering, and attendant charges. 3. Evidence of medical treatment, even without examining the treating doctor, can be considered for granting compensation towards medical expenses. Judgment Summary Background: This appeal (MACMA No. 2401 of 2009) was filed by the Insurance Company against an award granting compensation in a motor accident claim. The claimant filed cross-objections seeking enhancement of the awarded compensation. The claimant’s husband died due to injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident, and she suffered injuries as well. The Insurance Company contested liability based on the driver not having a valid license and the vehicle being used for purposes other than those cover

7. B. Venkat alias Venkateshwarulu vs Sri S. Raja Ramesh and The United India Insurance Company Limited on 06 July, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana6 Jul 2023

   Case Name: B. Venkat alias Venkateshwarulu vs Sri S. Raja Ramesh and The United India Insurance Company Limited on 06 July, 2023 Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 06 July, 2023 Bench: Smt Justice Lalitha Kanneganti Subject: Motor Vehicle Accident Claim Key Legal Propositions 1. The extent of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) can be enhanced if found inadequate considering the nature of injuries, disability, and future medical expenses. 2. Evidence regarding the extent of injuries and disability must be substantiated and credible to be considered for compensation. 3. The court can consider the period of treatment and potential future medical expenses while determining the overall compensation amount. Judgment Summary Background: This appeal arises from a claim petition filed seeking compensation for injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident. The claimant, B. Venkat, suffered a fracture of the patella and underwent surgery. The MACT awarded Rs. 32,500/- as compensation, which the claimant sought to enhance, arguing that the tribunal did not adequately consider his disability and future medical expens

8. Adnan Masood @ Adnan Be Masood vs J. Sitamahalaxmi & United India Insurance Company Limited on 12 December, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana12 Dec 2023

   Case Name: Adnan Masood @ Adnan Be Masood vs J. Sitamahalaxmi & United India Insurance Company Limited on 12 December, 2023 Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 12 December, 2023 Bench: Dr. Justice G. Radha Rani Subject: Motor Vehicle Accident – Enhancement of Compensation Key Legal Propositions 1. Compensation for injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident is determinable under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. 2. The extent of permanent disability requires a certificate from the Medical Board, though evidence from treating doctors can be considered. 3. Loss of earnings can be reasonably calculated based on the claimant’s stated income and the duration of incapacitation. Judgment Summary Background: This appeal arises from a claim petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking enhanced compensation for injuries sustained by the appellant in a motor vehicle accident on 04.10.2003. The Tribunal had awarded Rs. 41,000/- which the appellant sought to enhance to Rs. 2,00,000/-. The core dispute revolved around the extent of permanent disability, loss of earnings, and adequacy of medical expenses a

9. Srigadi Shankaraiah vs A. Ramalinga Swamy & Ors on 10 November, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana10 Nov 2023

   Case Name: Srigadi Shankaraiah vs A. Ramalinga Swamy & Ors on 10 November, 2023 Court: The High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 10 November, 2023 Bench: Smt Justice P. Sree Sudha Subject: Motor Accident Claim Appeal Key Legal Propositions 1. Quantum of compensation in motor accident claims is subject to enhancement based on the nature of injuries, loss of earnings, and other consequential damages. 2. The claimant is entitled to compensation for pain and suffering, loss of amenities, medical expenses, transportation charges, and extra nourishment resulting from the accident. 3. Interest on the enhanced compensation is payable from the date of filing the petition until realization of the amount. Judgment Summary Background: This appeal arises from a claim petition filed before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal seeking compensation for injuries sustained in a road traffic accident on 14.04.2004. The Tribunal awarded Rs. 54,750/-. The appellant/claimant challenged the inadequate quantum of compensation, leading to this appeal. There was no dispute regarding the accident or the negligence of the driver. Held: A. On Quantum of Compensation: Majori

10. United India Insurance Co Ltd vs Shaik Raheem on 25 July, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana25 Jul 2023

    Case Name: United India Insurance Co Ltd vs Shaik Raheem on 25 July, 2023 Court: High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 25 July, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice Sambasivarao Naidu Subject: Motor Accident Claims Appeal Key Legal Propositions 1. Appeals under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act can be disposed of through settlement at a Lok Adalat. 2. A Lok Adalat award is binding and operates as a decree, resolving the dispute between parties. 3. Pending miscellaneous petitions in an appeal are automatically closed upon disposal of the main appeal. Judgment Summary Background: This is a Motor Accident Claims Appeal (MACMA) filed by United India Insurance Co. Ltd. against an order and decree dated 15 February 2018 of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Khammam. A petition seeking a stay of further proceedings was also filed. Held: A. On Appeal Disposal: Majority View: The appeal was disposed of in terms of the award passed by the Lok Adalat on 10 June 2023, having been referred to Lok Adalat during pendency. No order as to costs was passed. Dissenting View: None. B. On Pending Miscellaneous Petitions: Majority View: All pending miscellaneous petitions in the appeal

11. The APSRTC vs Smt. D.S. Rajeshwari on 14 March, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana14 Mar 2023

    Case Name: The APSRTC vs Smt. D.S. Rajeshwari on 14 March, 2023 Court: The High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 14 March, 2023 Bench: Smt Justice Lalitha Kanneganti Subject: Motor Accident Claims Appeal Key Legal Propositions 1. In cases of rash and negligent driving leading to death, the burden of proving contributory negligence lies on the Road Transport Corporation (RTC). 2. While determining compensation, the Tribunal can consider a daily wage of Rs. 4,500/- for a daily wage earner in the absence of concrete evidence of income, referencing precedents like *Ramachandrarao vs Manager, Rogel Sundaram Aliyance*. 3. Enhancement of compensation is permissible based on heads like loss of dependency, loss of consortium, funeral expenses, and legal expenses, with interest accruing from the date of petition. Judgment Summary Background: The appeal arises from an award dated 07.09.2009 in a Motor Accident Claim Petition (MACP) concerning the death of D.S. Srinivasulu due to a collision with an APSRTC bus. The RTC filed an appeal against the award, while the claimant filed cross-objections seeking enhanced compensation. The Tribunal had found the bu

12. The A.P.S.R.T.C., Musheerabad, Hyderabad vs Shaik Nazeeruddin & another on 24 April, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana24 Apr 2023

    Case Name: The A.P.S.R.T.C. vs Shaik Nazeeruddin & another on 24 April, 2023 Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 24 April, 2023 Bench: Smt. Justice M.G. Priyadarshini Subject: Motor Vehicle Accident Claim Key Legal Propositions 1. In the absence of rebuttal evidence, a claim of contributory negligence cannot be accepted. 2. Compensation awarded by the Tribunal for injuries sustained in an accident, considering the nature of injuries, age, avocation, and income, requires no interference unless demonstrably excessive. 3. Interest at 7.5% per annum on awarded compensation from the date of petition till realization is just and reasonable, as per Apex Court precedent. Judgment Summary Background: This appeal arises from a Motor Accident Claim Petition (M.V.O.P. No. 286 of 2015) wherein the claimant sought compensation for injuries sustained in a road accident involving an APSRTC bus. The Tribunal partially allowed the claim, awarding Rs. 7,80,400/-. The APSRTC appealed, contesting the award and alleging contributory negligence on the part of the tractor trolley driver. Held: A. On Contributory Negligence: Majority View: The Court rejecte

13. Anjum Azra vs P. Purushotham Reddy and Others on 06 October, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana6 Oct 2023

    Case Name: Court: Date of Judgment: Bench: Subject: Key Legal Propositions 1. Absence of representation by the appellant leads to dismissal of the appeal for non-prosecution. 2. Repeated adjournments do not preclude the court from dismissing a case for non-prosecution when the appellant fails to appear. 3. The court has discretion to dismiss a case for non-prosecution when it assesses the appellant's lack of interest in pursuing litigation. Judgment Summary Background: This is a Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal (MACMA) under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act against an order dated 12.08.2004. The appellant, Anjum Azra, filed the appeal. The respondents are P. Purushotham Reddy, Janga Reddy, and United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Held: A. On Appeal for Non-Prosecution: Majority View: The Court dismissed the MACMA for non-prosecution due to the consistent absence of representation for the appellant, despite multiple adjournments and a listing under the caption 'for dismissal'. The Court concluded the appellant was not interested in pursuing the litigation. Dissenting View: None. B. On Pending Miscellaneous Applications: Majority View: All pending miscellaneous applicati

14. The New India Assurance Company Limited vs Smt. Sarojamma on 07 July, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana7 Jul 2023

    Case Name: The New India Assurance Company Limited vs Smt. Sarojamma on 07 July, 2023 Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 07 July, 2023 Bench: Smt Justice Lalitha Kanneganti Subject: Motor Vehicle Accident Claim – Liability of Insurance Company – Gratuitous Passengers vs. Labourers Key Legal Propositions 1. An insurance company is liable for compensation to injured labourers travelling in an accident vehicle owned by another, even if they are not formally listed as passengers. 2. The absence of evidence establishing passengers as gratuitous rather than labourers necessitates treating them as labourers for compensation purposes. 3. Reliance on precedents regarding gratuitous passengers is misplaced when the facts indicate the individuals were likely labourers engaged by the vehicle owner. Judgment Summary Background: This appeal arises from an award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (MACT) granting compensation to the respondent/claimant for injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident. The appellant/insurance company contests the award, arguing that the claimant and others were gratuitous passengers and therefore not cover

15. M/S ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Limited vs P.Karuna & Ors on 22 December, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana22 Dec 2023

    Case Name: M/S ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Limited vs P.Karuna & Ors on 22 December, 2023 Court: High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 22 December, 2023 Bench: P. Sam Koshy & Nagesh Bheemapaka, JJ. Subject: Motor Vehicle Accident Claim – Quantum of Compensation Key Legal Propositions 1. The status of employment (probationer vs. regular) does not preclude consideration of future prospects in calculating compensation in death cases under the Motor Vehicles Act. 2. A letter of appointment indicating regular employment, even with a probationary period, is sufficient evidence to justify the application of a higher multiplier for future prospects. 3. The Tribunal’s assessment of income based on salary slips and appointment letters is generally not subject to interference unless demonstrably erroneous. Judgment Summary Background: This appeal is filed by ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company against the award dated 10.12.2010 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Secunderabad, in a death case (M.V.O.P.No.162 of 2008). The Tribunal awarded Rs.60,00,000/- as compensation with 7.5% per annum interest. The Insurance Company challenges the Tribun

16. Kurpula Lingamma vs. The Divisional Manager, APSRTC on 28 June, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana28 Jun 2023

    Case Name: Kurpula Lingamma vs. The Divisional Manager, APSRTC on 28 June, 2023 Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 28 June, 2023 Bench: Justice Lalitha Kanneganti Subject: Motor Vehicle Accident Claim – Enhancement of Compensation Key Legal Propositions 1. Compensation for death in a motor vehicle accident should consider both the injuries sustained and the subsequent death attributable to those injuries. 2. In the absence of concrete evidence of income, a daily wage labourer’s monthly income can be estimated at Rs. 4,500/- as per precedents. 3. Future prospects of a self-employed deceased should be considered while calculating loss of dependency, and a deduction for personal expenses is permissible. Judgment Summary Background: This appeal arises from a claim petition filed before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal seeking compensation for the death of the claimant’s husband in a motor vehicle accident on 29.11.1996. The Tribunal awarded compensation only for the injuries sustained, not for the death. The claimant appeals seeking enhancement of compensation, arguing the death was a direct result of the injuries. Held: A. On Cause

17. HDFC ERGO General Insurance Co. Ltd vs Mohammad Masood on 18 December, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana18 Dec 2023

    Case Name: HDFC ERGO General Insurance Co. Ltd vs Mohammad Masood on 18 December, 2023 Court: The High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 18 December, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice Laxmi Narayana Alishetty Subject: Motor Vehicle Accident Claim Key Legal Propositions 1. An insurance company’s liability is not absolved by the driver’s lack of a valid driving license; the company can be directed to pay and then recover from the driver/owner. 2. While calculating compensation, a notional income can be considered based on prevailing economic conditions, and a deduction of 50% is appropriate for personal expenses of a bachelor. 3. Claimants are entitled to compensation for loss of estate and parental consortium as per established precedents. Judgment Summary Background: This appeal arises from a Motor Accident Claim Tribunal (MACT) award directing the appellant insurance company to pay compensation for a fatal accident caused by a lorry driver. The insurance company contested the award, citing violations of policy terms (driver lacking a valid license, vehicle unroadworthy) and disputing the income calculation used by the Tribunal. Held: A. On Validity of

18. Shriram General Insurance Company Ltd. vs. D. Padma & Ors. on 09 January, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana9 Jan 2023

    Case Name: Shriram General Insurance Company Ltd. vs. D. Padma & Ors. on 09 January, 2023 Court: High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 09 January, 2023 Bench: Smt. Justice M.G. Priyadarshini Subject: Motor Vehicle Accident Claim – Quantum of Compensation Key Legal Propositions 1. The extent of negligence required to absolve an insurance company from liability when the driver holds a license for a non-transport vehicle but drives a transport vehicle is no longer res integra, following the Mukund Dewangan v. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. precedent. 2. While determining compensation in motor accident cases, future prospects can be added to the income of the deceased, considering their age, and a multiplier of '15' is appropriate for a deceased aged 36 years, as per Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation. 3. The tribunal can consider the income of the deceased based on the evidence available, and if the evidence is insufficient, a reasonable estimation can be made, subject to scrutiny. Judgment Summary Background: These appeals arise from a Motor Accident Claims Petition (MACP) seeking compensation for the death of D. Mogulappa in a motor vehicle acciden

19. The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Hyderabad vs Smt. Azizunnisa & Ors. on 09 November, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana9 Nov 2023

    Case Name: The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Hyderabad vs Smt. Azizunnisa & Ors. on 09 November, 2023 Court: The High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 09 November, 2023 Bench: Smt. Justice P. Sree Sudha Subject: Motor Vehicle Accident Claim Appeal Key Legal Propositions 1. The rate of interest awarded by the Trial Court is generally not interfered with unless it is demonstrably unreasonable. 2. The Trial Court’s finding regarding negligence is generally upheld unless there are compelling reasons to overturn it. 3. Insurance companies are jointly and severally liable along with the vehicle owner for damages in motor accident claims. Judgment Summary Background: This appeal arises from a Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (MACT) award granting compensation to the family of the deceased, Fakruddin, who died in a motor vehicle accident. The insurance company (appellant) challenges the award, specifically contesting the interest rate and alleging negligence on the part of the deceased. The original petition (O.P.No.240 of 2012) claimed Rs. 30,00,000/- as compensation. The Trial Court awarded Rs. 22,66,000/- with 8% interest per annum. Held: A. On Int

20. T. Malla Goud vs Sri Sandeep Reddy and The United India Insurance Company Ltd. on 24 March, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana24 Mar 2023

    Case Name: T. Malla Goud vs Sri Sandeep Reddy and The United India Insurance Company Ltd. on 24 March, 2023 Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 24 March, 2023 Bench: Smt Justice M.G. Priyadarsini Subject: Motor Vehicle Accident Claim – Enhancement of Compensation Key Legal Propositions 1. The extent of compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (MACT) can be enhanced by the High Court if found inadequate considering the nature of injuries, treatment period, and medical expenses. 2. While proof of income is desirable, the court can reasonably estimate income in the absence of concrete evidence, particularly considering the claimant’s age and occupation. 3. The Tribunal’s finding regarding the manner of accident based on appreciation of evidence is generally not interfered with unless there are compelling reasons to do so. Judgment Summary Background: This appeal arises from a claim petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act seeking compensation for injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident on 06.11.2013. The claimant alleged that he was hit by a motorcycle due to its rash and negligent driving. Th

Search all 18,600 judgments →