a person who is recognised as a member of
Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes in his original
State, will be entitled to all the benefits of reservation
under the Constitution in that State only and not in
other States/Union Territories and not entitled to the
benefits of reservation in the migrated State/Union
It is an admitted
position that the deceased was the owner-cum-driver of the vehicle in question.
The accident had occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the vehicle
by the deceased. No other vehicle was involved in the accident. The deceased
himself was responsible for the accident. The deceased being the owner of the
offending vehicle was not a third party within the meaning of the Act. The
deceased was the victim of his own action of rash and negligent driving. A
Claimant, in our view, cannot maintain a claim on the basis of his own fault or
negligence and argue that even when he himself may have caused the accident
on account of his own rash and negligent driving, he can nevertheless make the
insurance company to pay for the same. Therefore, the respondents being the
LRs of the deceased could not have maintained the claim petition filed under
Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act.
Report no 266 As per recent media reports 35, the Bar Council of India conducted verification of advocates under the Bar Council of India Certificate and Place of Practice (Verification) Rules, 2015, and it was […]
PRESS RELEASE New Delhi, 29th August, 2018 The National Human Rights Commission, NHRC has taken suo motu cognizance of media reports about the arrest of five activists by the police from different […]
In common parlance, the term “suit” is taken to include all proceedings of a judicial or quasi-judicial nature in which the disputes of aggrieved parties are adjudicated before an impartial forum. Proceedings before the consumer for a fall squarely within that definition.
The legislature chose to give the National Commission power to review its ex prate orders. Before amendment, against dismissal of any case by the Commission, the consumer had to rush to this Court. The amendment in Section 22 and introduction of Section 22A were done for the convenience of the consumers. We have carefully ascertained the legislative intention and interpreted the law accordingly.
Brief summary of Rules pertaining to Non-Advocates in different jurisdictions United States of America • Congressional legislation neither grants nor denies the right to have a non-attorney representative in quasi-judicial proceedings. • […]
For the first time in 1856 a select committee recommended that a cheap and easy remedy, by a summary charge before a magistrate, should be afforded to consumers who received adulterated or […]
National Commission is not a Court. (See Laxmi Engineering Works v. P.S.G. Industrial Institute, (1995) 3 SCC 583; Charan Singh v. Healing Touch Hospital, (2000) 7 SCC 668; State of Karnataka v. […]
The frame work for the CP Act was provided by a Resolution dated 09.04.1985 of the General Assembly of the United Nations Organization, which is commonly known as consumer Protection Resolution No. […]