P MUNIRATHNAM Vs. MALLIGARJUNA RAO AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short facts of the case are as follows:-

(2.) The Insurance Company had filed counter statement and resisted the claim. The respondent denied the averments in the claim that the driver of the lorry had driven it negligently and dashed it against the side of the tractor, resulting in the tied rope snapping out. The respondent submitted that the petitioner is a tort-feasor and as such he is not entitled to receive any compensation. The averments in the claim regarding nature of injuries, mode of treatment and disability was not admitted.

(3.) On considering the averments of both parties, the tribunal had framed two issues, namely, (1) whether the accident had been caused by the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the first respondent's lorry (2) whether the claimant is entitled to get compensation If so, what is the quantum