UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. v. SUNIL KUMAR & ANR.
vidhipandit.com/case/sc-2017-11-137-137
Headnote — Supreme Court Reports (editorial summary, not part of the judgment)
Reporter's headnote (continued) and case details
(2017) l l S.C.R. 137
(Civil Appeal No. 9694 of2013) DECEMBEROl,2017 B Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - s.163A - Clarification given with respect to decision dated 24.11.2017 reported in {2017] II S.C.R. 130. c CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 9694 of2013. From the Judgment and Order dated I 0.10.2011 of the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in MAC Appeal No. 900/2011. Amit Kumar Singh, Mrs. E. Enatoli Serna (for Mis. Law D Associates), Ad vs. for the Appellant. Ajay Kumartalesara,Amit Singh Chauhan, Ms. Nidhi. Vipin Nair, P. B. Suresh, Abbay Pratap Singh, Advs. for the Respondents.
Judgment
The following Order of the Court was delivered: E ORDER Paragraph. I I of the Judgment dated 24.11.2017 passed by this Court in Civil Appeal No. 9694 of2013 reads as follows:- "11. As the final disposal of the appeal may take some time,we F are of the view that 50% of the compensation that is presently . lying in deposit in the Registry in terms of the Order dated 24.02.2012 should be released to the claimant on due identification." Upon a mention being made by the learned counsel for the respondent(s), the said paragraph will now be read to mean that the G . amount lying in deposit in the trial Court be released to the claimant(s) on due identification.
Nidhi Jain Clarification given with respect to ealier decision. H 137
Report an error in this judgment →
Contains information from the Indian High Court / Supreme Court Judgments dataset, licensed under CC-BY-4.0