Full Text
Translation output
to
A-4s
% L2.08.20rt
Present : Mr. Kanwal Chaudhary, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr. S.N. Prashar, Advocate for the respondent No.
Respondent No. t(a) to (d).
+MAC Appeal No. 35/2O11
*
The Award impugned is the Award dated 03.09.201-0 vide which compensation in the sum of Rs. 6,97,880/- had been awarded in favour of the claimants. Admittedly, mandatory provisions of
Section 1.70 of the Motor Vehicles Act have not been complied with; no permission has been taken by the appellant for preferring this appeal although the appeal has made a challenge even on the \I
I quantum of the compensation. Appeal is not maintainable; it is \ accordinglydismissed. , \ | ll
Statutory amount be released in favour /f tft" appellant. I l( tr
INDERMEET KAUR, J.
AUGUST L2,2OTL rb
2011:DHC:15318
A-4s
% L2.08.20rt
Present : Mr. Kanwal Chaudhary, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr. S.N. Prashar, Advocate for the respondent No.
Respondent No. t(a) to (d).
+MAC Appeal No. 35/2O11
*
The Award impugned is the Award dated 03.09.201-0 vide which compensation in the sum of Rs. 6,97,880/- had been awarded in favour of the claimants. Admittedly, mandatory provisions of
Section 1.70 of the Motor Vehicles Act have not been complied with; no permission has been taken by the appellant for preferring this appeal although the appeal has made a challenge even on the \I
I quantum of the compensation. Appeal is not maintainable; it is \ accordinglydismissed. , \ | ll
Statutory amount be released in favour /f tft" appellant. I l( tr
INDERMEET KAUR, J.
AUGUST L2,2OTL rb
2011:DHC:15318
JUDGMENT