Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

R S R T C LTD. JHUNJHUNU versus UMESH KUMAR AND ORS

High Court of Rajasthan

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


R S R T C LTD. JHUNJHUNU v UMESH KUMAR AND ORS - CMA Case No. 3622 of 2006 [2006] RD-RJ 2356 (20 October 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR

JUDGMENT

SB CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO.3622/2006

Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation Ltd.

V/s

Umesh Kumar & anr.

Date of order : : 20.10.2006

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S. ASOPA

Ms.Shruti Pareek, for the appellant.

This appeal has been filed by the Rajasthan

State Road Transport Corporation (For short "the

RSRTC") against the award dated 20.7.2006 in MAC case

No.(400/03) 624/05 passed by the MACT cum Additional

District Judge (Fast Track) No.3, Jhunjhunu.

The facts, in brief, of the case are that in an accident which took place on 3.7.2003, the Indica car

No.RJ 18C 4300 of the claimant was damaged.

The Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.1,30,654/- for damage of the car. Apart from the aforesaid amount, the Claims Tribunal further awarded Rs.1346/- towards other expenses. In all compensation of Rs.1,32,000/- has been awarded by the Claims Tribunal subject to filing of the registration certificate of the car before the Court or before the RSRTC.

The submission of counsel for the appellant is that without registration certificate, the Claims

Tribunal ought not to have entertained the claim of damages of the car.

In my view, the said issue is not of much importance in appeal as the Claims Tribunal itself safeguarded the rights of the Roadways by directing the claimant to produce the registration certificate either before the Claims Tribunal or before the

RSRTC. However, the claim was accepted on the ground of receipt of ownership of the car (Ex.11) from

Roshan Motors Pvt. Ltd. dated 23.4.2001 amounting to

Rs.3,49,002/-. Other documents of the damage of the car were also filed, which have been properly considered by the Claims Tribunal.

In view of above, the Claims Tribunal has not committed any kind of error.

The appeal fails and is dismissed.

(P.S. ASOPA) J. ummed/-


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.