proceeding with
truck Registration No. AS/01FC/9951 as a second driver, when they reached the Rattchjara
NH 44, due to mechanical defect, the vehicle ... second driver and the owner being made the statement
before the police that Shamiulla was the first driver and his son is the second driver
proceeding with
truck Registration No. AS/01FC/9951 as a second driver, when they reached the Rattchjara
NH 44, due to mechanical defect, the vehicle ... second driver and the owner being made the statement
before the police that Shamiulla was the first driver and his son is the second driver
proceeding with
truck Registration No. AS/01FC/9951 as a second driver, when they reached the Rattchjara
NH 44, due to mechanical defect, the vehicle ... second driver and the owner being made the statement
before the police that Shamiulla was the first driver and his son is the second driver
along with cleaner, accused
Sonu alias Gajendrasinh Dashrathsinh Sisodiya and one second driver
Subhanali left Gaziabad for Mumbai carrying goods in the truck ... drivers were at Mumbai some dispute took
place and the accused quarrelled with both the drivers i.e., deceased
driver Abdulgani and the second driver
compensation under
various heads.
4. The first respondent/owner and the second
respondent/driver of the offending vehicle remained ex parte.
5. The third respondent ... after hearing both sides, found
negligence on the part of the second respondent/driver of the
offending vehicle resulting in the incident and hence awarded
compensation under
various heads.
4. The first respondent/owner and the second
respondent/driver of the offending vehicle remained ex parte.
5. The third respondent ... after hearing both sides, found
negligence on the part of the second respondent/driver of the
offending vehicle resulting in the incident and hence awarded
compensation under
various heads.
4. The first respondent/owner and the second
respondent/driver of the offending vehicle remained ex parte.
5. The third respondent ... after hearing both sides, found
negligence on the part of the second respondent/driver of the
offending vehicle resulting in the incident and hence awarded
compensation under
various heads.
4. The first respondent/owner and the second
respondent/driver of the offending vehicle remained ex parte.
5. The third respondent ... after hearing both sides, found
negligence on the part of the second respondent/driver of the
offending vehicle resulting in the incident and hence awarded
compensation under
various heads.
4. The first respondent/owner and the second
respondent/driver of the offending vehicle remained ex parte.
5. The third respondent ... after hearing both sides, found
negligence on the part of the second respondent/driver of the
offending vehicle resulting in the incident and hence awarded
compensation under
various heads.
4. The first respondent/owner and the second
respondent/driver of the offending vehicle remained ex parte.
5. The third respondent ... after hearing both sides, found
negligence on the part of the second respondent/driver of the
offending vehicle resulting in the incident and hence awarded
