Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 12 (0.42 seconds)
Documents citing New India Assurance Company Limited vs Sandepudi Mariyamma And Ors. on 13 February, 2003

Khushal Singh Adhikari vs State Of Uttarakhand & Others on 12 May, 2022

16. The effect of the above decisions is that a vehicle, which is insured for agricultural purpose, cannot be used for any other purpose and if so used in contravention of the policy taken, the insurance company will not be liable. Coming to the decisions referred to by the learned Counsel for the claimants as well as insured are concerned, the decision in M.F.A. No. 2545/2003 of this Court concerns a person travelling as a loader in the tractor cum trailer and therefore, the Court observed that the claimants are entitled for compensation as per the W.C. Act. At the same time, it was observed in the said decision at paragraph No. 6 that the insurer has not placed any evidence before the Court to show that it is an agricultural tractor-trailer. The facts therefore are different from the one with which we are concerned, because in the instant case, the policy Ex.R1 clearly indicates that the tractor-cum trailer was to be used only for agricultural purpose and for no other purpose.
Uttarakhand High Court Cites 38 - Cited by 0 - S K Sharma - Full Document

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. vs R. Anantha Reddy And Ors. on 28 September, 2005

Similarly, the judgment of this Court in the case of Sandepuri Mariyamma (1 supra) will not help to the Insurance Company since in that case tractor involved in accident used for a purpose other than for agriculture, namely, transportation of Napa slabs, contrary to terms of the insurance policy. Therefore, insurer is not liable to pay compensation to the claimants or to indemnify the owner of the vehicle. Once the policy covers the risk of driver and 6 labourers, which impliedly authorizes or permitted the insured to carry the labourers in the tractor-trailer when the vehicle is used for agricultural operations, Insurance Company has undertaken the liability of the insured in the event of any accident during course of employment.
Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana) Cites 17 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

The Divisional Manager, United India ... vs Smt. Akkavva W/O Mahadevappa ... on 15 February, 2007

16. The effect of the above decisions is that a vehicle, which is insured for agricultural purpose, cannot be used for any other purpose and if so used in contravention of the policy taken, the insurance company will not be liable. Coming to the decisions referred to by the learned Counsel for the claimants as well as insured are concerned, the decision in M.F.A. No. 2545/2003 of this Court concerns a person travelling as a loader in the tractor cum trailer and therefore, the Court observed that the claimants are entitled for compensation as per the W.C. Act. At the same time, it was observed in the said decision at paragraph No. 6 that the insurer has not placed any evidence before the Court to show that it is an agricultural tractor-trailer. The facts therefore are different from the one with which we are concerned, because in the instant case, the policy Ex.R1 clearly indicates that the tractor-cum trailer was to be used only for agricultural purpose and for no other purpose.
Karnataka High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 14 - V Jagannathan - Full Document

Icici Lombard General Insurance Co. ... vs Kakkala Madhavi, E.G. District 6 Ots on 31 January, 2022

10. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the vehicle was not being used for agricultural purpose against the policy terms and hence, the insurance company is not liable to pay any compensation. Learned counsel has relied upon a decision reported in New India Assurance Company Limited, Ongole Vs. Sandepudi Mariyamma and others1. He submits that when mud was being transported and the accident took place in the agricultural field, it cannot be said that it was not for agricultural purpose and the decision relied upon is relating to carrying of Napa slabs in a vehicle to be used for agricultural purpose and hence the observations made therein are not applicable to the present case.
Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

The New India Assurance Company Limited vs Pulikanti Laxmamma on 19 June, 2023

6. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company submits that as per the claimant, it is admitted by her that they have travelled in the crime vehicle to attend the funeral of their relative by paying price for transportation, but as per the conditions of the policy, there is no insurance coverage for the passengers. It is stated that the tractor is insured for agricultural purpose. It is also their case that as per Ex.A1 i.e. FIR and Ex.A2 charge sheet, the accident occurred while the claimant and others was taking the dead body in the crime vehicle driven by its driver in a negligent manner. According to the learned counsel, the Court erred in concluding that the dead body carried in the tractor - trailer falls within the meaning of 'goods' as defined in Section 2(13) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1998. It is the case of the Insurance Company that the Insurance Company is not liable to pay the compensation as the said vehicle is insured for agricultural purpose and for other than agricultural purpose, they cannot use the vehicle. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company has relied on the judgment of this Court in New India 3 Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Sandepudi Mariyamma1 and also the judgment of the Apex Court in National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Chinnamma2 and submits that the respondent insurance company is not liable to pay the compensation.
Telangana High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - L Kanneganti - Full Document

The New India Assurance Company Limited vs Mandimadugu Alivelu And Anr. on 19 June, 2023

6. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company submits that as per the claimant, it is admitted by her that they were travelling in the crime vehicle to attend the funeral of their relative by paying price for transportation, but as per the conditions of the policy, there is no insurance coverage for the passengers. It is stated that the tractor is insured for agricultural purpose. It is also their case that as per Ex.A1 i.e. FIR and Ex.A2 charge sheet, the accident occurred while the claimant and others was taking the dead body in the crime vehicle driven by its driver in a negligent manner. According to the learned counsel, the Court erred in concluding that the dead body carried in the tractor - trailer falls within the meaning of 'goods' as defined in Section 2(13) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1998. It is the case of the Insurance Company that the Insurance Company is not liable to pay the compensation as the said vehicle is insured for agricultural purpose and for other than agricultural purpose, they cannot use the vehicle. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company has relied on the judgment of this Court in New India 3 Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Sandepudi Mariyamma1 and also the judgment of the Apex Court in National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Chinnamma2 and submits that the respondent insurance company is not liable to pay the compensation.
Telangana High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - L Kanneganti - Full Document

The New India Assurance Company Limited ... vs Budigepaka Salamma on 19 June, 2023

6. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company submits that as per the claimant, it is admitted by her that they have travelled in the crime vehicle to attend the funeral of their relative by paying price for transportation, but as per the conditions of the policy, there is no insurance coverage for the passengers. It is stated that the tractor is insured for agricultural purpose. It is also their case that as per Ex.A1 i.e. FIR and Ex.A2 charge sheet, the accident occurred while the claimant and others was taking the dead body in the crime vehicle driven by its driver in a negligent manner. According to the learned counsel, the Court erred in concluding that the dead body carried in the tractor - trailer falls within the meaning of 'goods' as defined in Section 2(13) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1998. It is the case of the Insurance Company that the Insurance Company is not liable to pay the compensation as the said vehicle is insured for agricultural purpose and for other than agricultural purpose, they cannot use the vehicle. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company has relied on the judgment of this Court in New India 3 Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Sandepudi Mariyamma1 and also the judgment of the Apex Court in National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Chinnamma2 and submits that the respondent insurance company is not liable to pay the compensation.
Telangana High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - L Kanneganti - Full Document

The New India Assurance Company ... vs Budigepaka Yellamma on 19 June, 2023

6. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company submits that as per the claimant, it is admitted by her that they have travelled in the crime vehicle to attend the funeral of their relative by paying price for transportation, but as per the conditions of the policy, there is no insurance coverage for the passengers. It is stated that the tractor is insured for agricultural purpose. It is also their case that as per Ex.A1 i.e. FIR and Ex.A2 charge sheet, the accident occurred while the claimant and others was taking the dead body in the crime vehicle driven by its driver in a negligent manner. According to the learned counsel, the Court erred in concluding that the dead body carried in the tractor - trailer falls within the meaning of 'goods' as defined in Section 2(13) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1998. It is the case of the Insurance Company that the Insurance Company is not liable to pay the compensation as the said vehicle is insured for agricultural purpose and for other than agricultural purpose, they cannot use the vehicle. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company has relied on the judgment of this Court in New India 3 Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Sandepudi Mariyamma1 and also the judgment of the Apex Court in National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Chinnamma2 and submits that the respondent insurance company is not liable to pay the compensation.
Telangana High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - L Kanneganti - Full Document

The New India Assurance Company Limited vs Pulikanti Muthyalu on 19 June, 2023

6. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company submits that as per the claimant, it is admitted by her that they have travelled in the crime vehicle to attend the funeral of their relative by paying price for transportation, but as per the conditions of the policy, there is no insurance coverage for the passengers. It is stated that the tractor is insured for agricultural purpose. It is also their case that as per Ex.A1 i.e. FIR and Ex.A2 charge sheet, the accident occurred while the claimant and others was taking the dead body in the crime vehicle driven by its driver in a negligent manner. According to the learned counsel, the Court erred in concluding that the dead body carried in the tractor - trailer falls within the meaning of 'goods' as defined in Section 2(13) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1998. It is the case of the Insurance Company that the Insurance Company is not liable to pay the compensation as the said vehicle is insured for agricultural purpose and for other than agricultural purpose, they cannot use the vehicle. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company has relied on the judgment of this Court in New India 3 Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Sandepudi Mariyamma1 and also the judgment of the Apex Court in National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Chinnamma2 and submits that the respondent insurance company is not liable to pay the compensation.
Telangana High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - L Kanneganti - Full Document
1   2 Next