North West Karnataka Road Transport ... vs Kulsumbi on 7 September, 2010
7. Per contra, ,--.1earVnCCi':-. eo_U.nse'I'~...foi" the
respondent--c}aimants siib'n1.'1t_s§jchat.d_'*ien"'-View of the
decision repor_ted&:'---in .:A:C_:JVVV'1':?V§'>9 (Gujarat
State vs. Hathibhai
Senghabhqi others) the claimants
are e11t_itIed°~,to' Vc'E_aAi:f1Veompensation under the
eté§"L1--i:Ader Section 166 of M.V.Act.
of the arguments addressed by
ddv'--x.the I'eet'fnevd."e'odnse1s for the parties, the foilowing