Supreme Court of India
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. versus MANJIT KAUR AND ORS. on 5 January 2004
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
A
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. V.
MANJIT KAUR AND ORS.
JANUARY 5, 2004
B (V. N. KHARE, CJ. AND S.B. SINHA, J.]
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988-Motor accident-Driver of vehicle not holding licence-Compensation-Awarded by Tribunal and Co11/ir111ed by High Court c [with ][permission ][to ][Insurance ][C:ompany ][to ][realize ][the ][amount ][from ][the ][driver ]of the vehicle-On appeal, held: In view of the facts of the case orders of Courts below justified and need no inference under discretionary jurisdiction-Constitution of India, 1950-Article 136.
National Insurance Co. ltd v. Swaran Singh and Ors., 120041 3 SCC
D [297, ][relied ][on. ]
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Special Leave Petition (C) No. 176 of 2004.
From the Judgment and· Order dated 12.12.2002 of the Punjab and E [Haryana ][High ][Court ][in ][F.A.0. ][No. ][5766 ][of ][2002. ]
Dr. Kailash Chand (N.P.) for the Petitioner.
The Judgment of the Cou1t was delivered by
V. N. KHARE, CJ. This Special Leave Petition is directed against a F judgment and order dated 12112/2002 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh whereby and whereunder it affirmed the award passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ropar in Case No. 119 of 8.12.2000. The question raised in the Special Leave Petition is as to whether in view of the finding of the Learned Tribunal that the driver of the Maruti G [Car ][was ][not ][holding ][a ][driving ][licence ][and ][paiticularly ][when ][he ][happened ][to ]be the owner of the vehicle, the learned Tribunal as well as the High Court committed an error in passing the impugned judgment.
F
Keeping in view of the fact that both the Tribunal and the High Court had recorded that the Petitioner would be entitled to realise the amount of H 126
_..,
.,
{
"~
.,.
i
,A
I·
!!;
compensation as assessed from the driver of the offending vehicle, we do not A intend to exercise our discretionary jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution of India, particularly, having regard to our decision in SLP (Civil) No. 9027 of 2003, National Insurance Co. ltd. v. Swaran Singh and Ors. we do not intend to exercise our discretionary jurisdiction in the matter.
B
The Petition is dismissed.
K.K.T.
Petition dismissed.