Sheopal v. Hazari Lal and Ors.
Rajasthan HCCMA/320/2007
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
+ h b % .'no fault 1 k v. we have examined…
A compact analysis
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
¶1
t
¶2
- B 3 T FFT + h b % .'no fault
¶3
- 1k v. we have examined the nature of the 'no -fault compensation'
¶4
- payBle under section 140 of the Act in , Eshwarappa @ aheshwara~~a and Anr. vs. C.S. Gurushanthappa and Anr. (Civil Appeal No.7049 of 2002), the judgment in which is pronounced today. We, therefore, do not wish to elaborate the point further. Suffice to say that in view of our judgment in Civil Appeal No.7049 of 2002, the Tribunal was patently in errdr, 'in directing for the refund of the amount of 'no fault comen&atbii"klready paid to the claimants, to the insurance company. The High Court was equally in error+jn missing out this grave mistake.in the judgment and order passed by the Tribunal and not setting it right. "
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Rajasthan HC
- Decided on
- · January
- Registered
- Case no.
- CMA/320/2007
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court