Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.26 seconds)
Documents citing New India Assurance Company Limited vs Mahadev Jatta Naik And Another on 10 July, 1990

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. vs Sulochana Bewa And Ors. on 28 September, 1994

(i) In New India Assurance Co. Ltd. (supra) the Karnataka High Court held that by requiring the appellant who has suffered the award to deposit certain amount of money under the first proviso to Section 173 of the New Act, the New Act has controlled the right of appeal. The New Act is admittedly prospective. There is nothing in the said statute and particularly in Section 173 or in Section 217 thereof to read that by enactment of the provision relating to pre-deposit of certain amount of the award by the appellant the vested right crystalised in his favour at the commencement of the lis has been taken away. The New Act being not retrospective, the condition precedent to deposit all the required amount of the award by the appellant is applicable to cases coming under the provisions of the New Act only. For the aforesaid reasons, I respectfully differ with the view expressed in the aforesaid decision of the Karnataka High Court.
Orissa High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Jammu And Kashmir Projects ... vs Fatima Begum And Ors. on 4 June, 1999

15. In some cases it has been held that in respect of an appeal against award filed after the enforcement of Act of 1988, the requirement of deposit of the amount provided by Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act is mandatory. The deposit of the amount is a condition precedent to exercise of right of appeal filed after 1988 Act came into force, irrespective of the question whether the incident took place or claim petition was filed or the award was made before the Act of 1988 came into force or not. [See 1994 SC Cri R 336 (338); 1996 AIHC 1314 (1316) (Bom); New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Mahadev Jatta Naik 1992 ACJ 100 (Karnataka); Gaya Prasad v. Suresh Kumar 1992 ACJ 200 (MP); Ramesh Singh v. Chinta Devi 1995 ACJ 130 (Patna); and Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. P. Mariyamma 1994 ACJ 1219 (AP)].
Jammu & Kashmir High Court Cites 18 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Md. Makibar Rahman vs Md. Islam Ali And Ors. on 21 June, 1993

8. Mr. Barkataki appearing for the insurance company has placed reliance in New India Assurance Company v. Mohadev Jatta Naik, 1992 ACJ 100. This is adecision of the Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court and it was held that when an appeal filed after the commencement of the new Act, 1988, the proviso to Sub-section (1) of Section 173 of the M.V. Act, 1988 shall apply.
Gauhati High Court Cites 9 - Cited by 0 - S N Phukan - Full Document
1