Baxi Amrik Singh V.

Union of India

IN THE HON’BLE
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

IN THE MATTER OF

BAXI AMRIK SINGH

APELLANT
V.

UNION OF INDIA
RESPONDENT

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF

Baxi Amrik Singh

ABHIMANYU KANWAL
Roll no.-4
Sem-III, Section A

HIDAYATULLAH NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, RAIPUR

1
 Baxi Amrik Singh V. Union of India

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Index of Authority………………………………………………………………………….3

2. List of Abberivation………………………………………………………………………..4

3. Statement of Fact…………………………………………………………………………..5

4. Issue Raised………………………………………………………………………………..7

5. Summary of Pleading……………………………………………………………………..8

6. Pleading……………………………………………………………………………………9

7. Prayer……………………………………………………………………………………..11

2
 Baxi Amrik Singh V. Union of India

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

STATUTES:

 LAW OF TORTS
 CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1950

BOOKS:

 MULLA PRINCIPLES OF MOHOMEDAN LAW

 HEDAYA, COMMENTARY ON ISLAMIC LAW

JUDICIAL DECISIONS:

 USMAN KHAN V. FATHIMUNISSA BEGUM, 1990 CR LJ 1364 (AP)

 SYED IQBAL HUSSAIN V. SYED NASAMUNNISSA BEGUM, 1992 CR LJ 1823 (AP)
 NIZAMUNNISA BEGUM V. ABDUL MANJEET, 1995 CRI LJ 3156 (MAD)

3
 Baxi Amrik Singh V. Union of India

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

1. & : And

2. AP : Andra Pradesh

3. CRLJ : Civil Right for court of limited Jurisdiction

4. CrPC : Code of Criminal Procedure

5. Hon’ble : Honourable

6. Mad : Madras

4
 Baxi Amrik Singh V. Union of India

STATEMENT OF FACTS

1. On 14th May, 1967, at about 2:30 P.M., a military truck No. SL 8085, which was
driven by Sepoy Man Singh on the Mall Road Ambala Cantt., was involved in an
accident with a car, of which one of the occupants was Amrik Singh. As a result of
this accident, Amrik Singh received a number of injuries and became unconscious. He
was removed to the military hospital in an ambulance car. From there, he was
discharged on the next day for being treated by a civil doctor. It is said that, thereafter,
he remained under treatment for about 2 months. Subsequently, Amrik Singh filed a
petition claiming compensation amount of Rs. 50,000 against the Union of India. He
also impleaded Sepoy Man Singh because according to Amrik Singh, the incident had
taken place due to the rash and negligent driving on the part of Sepoy Man Singh.

2. There was no negligence on the part of the driver of the car in which Amrik Singh
was sitting. Sepoy Man Singh was engaged in military duty in checking military
personnel on duty and, therefore, he was acting in the exercise of the sovereign
powers of the Union Government at the time of the accident. He was asked to carry
the military personnel to Niger cinema, which he did and then returned to the cinema.
It is thus implied that Sepoy Man Singh was on military duty that whole particular
day on which the incident happened i.e. !4th May, 1967..

5
 Baxi Amrik Singh V. Union of India

6
 Baxi Amrik Singh V. Union of India

ISSUES RAISED

I. WHETHER THE ACCIDENT TOOK PLACE DUE TO THE RASH DRIVING AND

NEGLIGENCE OF SEPOY MAN SINGH, DRIVER OF THE MILITARY TRUCK

NO. SL 8085?

II. WHETHER THE APPLICANT IS ENTITLED TO ANY COMPENSATION AND IF

SO TO WHAT AMOUNT?

III. WHETHER SEPOY MAN SINGH, DRIVER OF THE TRUCK IN QUESTION WAS

ACTING IN THE EXERCISE OF THE SOVEREIGN POWERS OF THE UNION

GOVERNMENT AT THE TIME OF THE ACCIDENT AND IF SO WHETHER THE
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA IS NOT LIABLE FOR HIS NEGLIGENCE?

7
 Baxi Amrik Singh V. Union of India

SUMMARY OF PLEADINGS

I.

WHETHER THE ACCIDENT TOOK PLACE DUE TO THE RASH DRIVING AND
NEGLIGENCE OF SEPOY MAN SINGH, DRIVER OF THE MILITARY TRUCK NO.

SL 8085?

8
 Baxi Amrik Singh V. Union of India

PLEADINGS

I.

WHETHER THE DEFENDANT IS LIABLE UNDER DEFAMATION

It is humbly submitted before the court that the articles published in De

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

In the lights of the facts stated, arguments advanced, authorities cited the Counsel shall
request the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India to declare and adjudge:

a. Humbly dismiss the appeal.

b. The respondent shall not be made liable to pay maintenance to the appellant.

Also shall pass any other judgment in the light of justice, equity and good conscience.

All of which is most respectfully submitted.

PLACE: COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT

DELHI
DEEPAK KUMAR PATEL