Login : Advocate | Client
Home Post Your Case My Account Law College Law Library

Report No. 85

7.6. Need for section 110, proviso, debatable-Deletion recommended.-

Prima facie, therefore, there is a case for deleting the proviso to section 110 in the light of the above considerations. We have not been able to think of any counter-balancing considerations that would justify its retention. If the intention is that claims for a high amount, i.e. exceeding a particular figure, should be tried only by ordinary courts, then the same reasoning should apply to claims for personal injuries which exceed that particular figure. But there is no such pecuniary limit on the competence of the Tribunal in regard to claims for compensation for personal injuries. Nor is the proviso needed to protect the interests of the Insurance Company. There is, as the law now stands, no difference in the statutory liability of the insurance company, whether the proceedings are held under the Motor Vehicles Act or under the ordinary law.

Claims for Compensation under Chapter 8 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 Back

Client Area | Advocate Area | Blogs | About Us | User Agreement | Privacy Policy | Advertise | Media Coverage | Contact Us | Site Map
powered and driven by neosys