<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2015 (10) TMI 2528 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185804</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, upholding the compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. The Court emphasized the joint and several liability of both drivers in cases of composite negligence, highlighting that the plaintiff can recover the entire compensation from any of the joint tortfeasors. The Court clarified that apportionment of compensation between tortfeasors is not permissible in such cases.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 27 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 Aug 2016 13:28:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=439458" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (10) TMI 2528 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185804</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, upholding the compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. The Court emphasized the joint and several liability of both drivers in cases of composite negligence, highlighting that the plaintiff can recover the entire compensation from any of the joint tortfeasors. The Court clarified that apportionment of compensation between tortfeasors is not permissible in such cases.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 27 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185804</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>