Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.88 seconds)
Dav Managing Committee & Anr vs Dabwali Fire Tragedy Victims Assn.& Ors on 23 January, 2013 cites

Lata Wadhwa & Ors vs State Of Bihar & Ors on 16 August, 2001

4. It is only to the aforesaid extent, the appellants herein are confined to their relief in this appeal though they have questioned the impugned judgment urging various grounds regarding the findings recorded on the contentious issues, namely the negligence on the part of the appellants and the quantum of compensation awarded in favour of each one of the claimants, in respect to the dead persons and the injured persons by applying the guidelines and the judgments of this Court and also the All England Reports and the Division Bench Judgments of the Karnataka High Court and the Delhi High Court on the question of awarding compensation in favour of the claimants, namely Lata Wadhwa & Ors. Vs. State of Bihar & Ors. reported in (2001) 8 SCC 197, and Association of Victims of Uphaar Tragedy and Ors. V. Union of India and Ors. reported in 104 (2003) Delhi Law Times 234 (DB) and another judgment of this Court in the case of D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal reported in (1997) 1 SCC 416. The quantum of compensation awarded by the High Court by following the principle laid down in the aforesaid judgments of this Court and Delhi High Court that was challenged in this Appeal, but the same was not pressed into service at the time of hearing, except urging the legal contention regarding non apportionment of the percentage of liability of compensation upon respondent no.8 having answered the issue no.3 regarding the negligence on the part of both the appellants and respondent no.8—Rajiv Marriage Palace. Since the learned senior counsel has advanced the arguments only with regard to the non-apportionment of the percentage of the liability of compensation upon the appellants and respondent no.8 the learned senior counsel on behalf of the appellants has confined the aforesaid issue inviting our attention to the findings recorded on the issue no.3 by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana. It was pointed out to this Court by the learned senior counsel that the percentage of liability of compensation fastened by the Commission of Inquiry upon the appellants to the extent of 80% that has been interfered with the High Court has its higher percentage of liability of compensation fixed upon the management of School and accordingly it was modified to 55%.
Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 1298 - Full Document

Assn. Of Victims Of Uphaar Tragedy And ... vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 24 April, 2003

After making the observation the liability of compensation to be confined and apportionment depending upon the nature and extent of the role played by the tort-feasors in the commission of the tort and the resultant loss to the claimants, the High Court after referring to the Association of Victims of Uphaar Tragedy case (supra) has reduced from 80% to 55% liability of compensation after recording a finding that both the appellant school and the respondent no.8 has tort-feasors on account of their negligence the fire accident had taken place and the persons who participated in the function died and others had burn injuries. Having recorded such a finding of fact regarding negligence both upon the appellants and respondent no.8 non apportioning the percentage of liability of compensation out of 55% liability of compensation fixed the appellants have got the grievance of that portion of finding on the question no.3 formulated answered against both the appellants and respondent no.8, therefore, this appeal is confined only to the aforesaid extent sought for in this appeal.
Delhi High Court Cites 28 - Cited by 30 - S K Mahajan - Full Document

Shri D.K. Basu,Ashok K. Johri vs State Of West Bengal,State Of U.P on 18 December, 1996

4. It is only to the aforesaid extent, the appellants herein are confined to their relief in this appeal though they have questioned the impugned judgment urging various grounds regarding the findings recorded on the contentious issues, namely the negligence on the part of the appellants and the quantum of compensation awarded in favour of each one of the claimants, in respect to the dead persons and the injured persons by applying the guidelines and the judgments of this Court and also the All England Reports and the Division Bench Judgments of the Karnataka High Court and the Delhi High Court on the question of awarding compensation in favour of the claimants, namely Lata Wadhwa & Ors. Vs. State of Bihar & Ors. reported in (2001) 8 SCC 197, and Association of Victims of Uphaar Tragedy and Ors. V. Union of India and Ors. reported in 104 (2003) Delhi Law Times 234 (DB) and another judgment of this Court in the case of D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal reported in (1997) 1 SCC 416. The quantum of compensation awarded by the High Court by following the principle laid down in the aforesaid judgments of this Court and Delhi High Court that was challenged in this Appeal, but the same was not pressed into service at the time of hearing, except urging the legal contention regarding non apportionment of the percentage of liability of compensation upon respondent no.8 having answered the issue no.3 regarding the negligence on the part of both the appellants and respondent no.8—Rajiv Marriage Palace. Since the learned senior counsel has advanced the arguments only with regard to the non-apportionment of the percentage of the liability of compensation upon the appellants and respondent no.8 the learned senior counsel on behalf of the appellants has confined the aforesaid issue inviting our attention to the findings recorded on the issue no.3 by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana. It was pointed out to this Court by the learned senior counsel that the percentage of liability of compensation fastened by the Commission of Inquiry upon the appellants to the extent of 80% that has been interfered with the High Court has its higher percentage of liability of compensation fixed upon the management of School and accordingly it was modified to 55%.
Supreme Court of India Cites 27 - Cited by 2221 - K Singh - Full Document
1