Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 18 (2.00 seconds)
Documents citing The Bihar Co-Operative Motor Vehicles ... vs Rameshwar Raut And Ors. on 16 May, 1969

Hindusthan General Insurance Society ... vs Daya Nath Jha And Ors. on 1 May, 1970

13. On the evidence of Dr. B. Mukhopadhyaya (A.W. 2), Dr. Jogendra Prasad Sinha (A. W. 4) and Dr. Anirudha Prasad (A. W. 5) with the aid of exhibits 8 and 8(a), it has rightly been held by the Tribunal that the appellant did suffer fracture of the bone in his hip which was not of a minor character but was also not such as to bring any appreciable permanent disability. The said materials indicate that the appellant had to remain in the Patna Medical College Hospital for four weeks, was not able to join his normal duties thereafter for about two months and was able to perform some duties in his office in a period of about six months. He had to undergo physiotheraphy treatment for a considerable period even till the time of his deposition in the year 1965. All that indicates that the appellant had suffered such bodily injury which entitled him to be compensated for the loss caused to him on account of that injury ; the bodily injury bringing pain in the body, shock and hindrance in the enjoyment of life and the like. Although the appellant in his evidence, as it seems, was afraid of claiming that he was suffering from any kind of physical disability at the time of his deposition before the Tribunal, because that might have created a risk in his continuing in service, on a careful consideration of the evidence of Dr. Mukhopadhyaya, it would be evident that the appellant got a defect in his hip bone which would not be perfectly cured and caused a partial permanent disability. But, the amount of disability was not such as to entitle him to claim an exhorbitant compensation as claimed on his behalf in this appeal; nor was it so minor as to say that the award of Rs. 15,000 by the Tribunal taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances of the case exhorbitant or such as to call for any interference in appeal. A number of cases have been considered on the point by Tarkeshwar Nath J. in Bihar Co-operative Motor Vehicles Insurance Society Ltd. v. Rameshwar Raut, [1970] 40 Comp. Cas. 534, 547 ; [1969] B.L.J.R. 919 at page 929 onwards.
Patna High Court Cites 19 - Cited by 4 - N L Untwalia - Full Document

Mathew Alexander vs Sreedharan Pillay And Ors. on 21 July, 1989

11. Even otherwise, the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal has got the power to condone the dalay in filing the application for compensation under the Act. But an ordinary civil court has no such power in respect of an original suit. The principle that an amendment shall not ordinarily be allowed if the claims is barred cannot be extended to a proceeding before the M.A.C.T. as specific power is conferred for condoning the delay. This further strengthens our view that in appropriate cases, amendment of pleadings can be allowed even after the period of limitation and with respect we dissent from the contrary view taken in Bihar Co. op. K.V. Insc. Society v. Rameshwar and Champa v. C.C. & Industries on which reliance was placed by counsel for the respondent.
Kerala High Court Cites 17 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Mathew Alexander vs Bhaskaran Pillai Sreedharan Pillai And ... on 21 July, 1989

10. Even otherwise, the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal has got the power to condone the delay in filing the application for compensation under the Act. But an ordinary civil court has no such power in respect of an original suit. The principle that an amendment shall not ordinarily be allowed if the claim is barred cannot be extended to a proceeding before the M.A.C.T. as specific power is conferred for condening the delay. This further strengthens our view that in appropriate cases, amendment of pleadings can be allowed even after the period of limitation and with respect we dissent from the contrary view taken in Bihar Co.-op. M. V. Insc. Society v. Rameshwar, AIR 1970 Patna 172 and Champa v. C.C. and Industries, AIR 1972 Patna 259 on which reliance was placed by counsel for the respondent.
Kerala High Court Cites 16 - Cited by 4 - Full Document

S.K. Devi vs Uttam Bhoi And Anr. on 23 April, 1974

In this context Mr. Misra relied on AIR 1970 Pat 172 (Bihar Co-op. M. V. Insurance Society v. Rameshwar). It is a case where a mother and a child were run over and met their end. while tending cattle, by an accident, and a compensation of Rs. 6,000 was granted, which on. appeal was modified and Rs. 3,000 was granted towards the death of the mother and Rs. 2,600 for the child. According to Mr. Misra the principles enunciated in this citation have been lost sight of by the learned lower court and he has granted a higher compensation. I do not think this contention can prevail. Law is well settled that on appeal the quantum of damages will not be disturbed unless either (i) the Tribunal had applied a wrong principle of law, or. misdirected itself, or (ii) the amount awarded either was so inordinately low or was so inordinately high that it must be held as erroneous. The normal rule therefore was that no appeal lay on the quantum of damages unless it involved a matter of principle. The principles and criteria for ascertaining the amount of compensation have not been laid down in the Motor Vehicles Act, but the Claims Tribunal can make en award determining the amount of compensation which appears to it to be just and reasonable, and it has to specify the person or persons who shall be paid and the amount as well which shall be paid by the insurer.
Orissa High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 8 - Full Document

Konidala Jaya Bharati And Anr. vs A. Chokkalingam And Anr. on 23 September, 1996

Society v. Rameshwar", and in "Howrah Insurance Co. v. Yuktinath", In this view of the matter, I hold that the owner is an aggrieved person and the appeal filed by him is maintainable, even if the insurance company is made liable regarding the quantum awarded by the Tribunal. Therefore, the learned single Judge in this case rightly held that the joint appeal filed by the insurance company and the owner was maintainable and thus the impugned order does not call for any interference.
Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana) Cites 34 - Cited by 2 - B S Raikote - Full Document

Konidala Jaya Bharati And Anr. vs A. Chokkalingam And Anr. on 23 September, 1996

However, I wish to add that even though the owner is aggrieved person regarding the quantum of compensation such a quantum of compensation may not be interfered with in appeal filed by him, unless the Tribunal applies wrong principles of law or misdirects itself or the amount awarded is too low or too high, as held by the High Court of Patna in Bihar Co-operative Motor Vehicles Insurance Society Ltd. v. Rameshwar Raut 1969 ACJ 405 (Patna) and in Howrah Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Yukti Nath Jha 1974 ACJ 18 (Patna). In this view of the matter, I hold that the owner is an aggrieved person and the appeal filed by him is maintainable, even if the insurance company is made liable regarding the quantum awarded by the Tribunal. Therefore, the learned single Judge in this case rightly held that the joint appeal filed by the insurance company and the owner was maintainable and thus the impugned order does not call for any interference.
Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana) Cites 36 - Cited by 0 - B S Raikote - Full Document

United India Fire And General Insurance ... vs M.S. Durairaj And Ors. on 23 February, 1981

In Bihar Co-operative Motor Vehicles Insurance Society Ltd. v. Rameshwar Raur. , the Claims Tribunal has been held to be competent to give permission for amendment of the pleadings, when such amendment does not prejudice any accrued right of any party. The fact that the Tribunal is invested with the power to adopt summary procedure for a speedy disposal of the claim petition does not mean that it can ignore a salutary rule of law, which ensures that the parties can adduce evidence only with reference to their own pleadings. The said position does not differ whether the Claims Tribunal is considered to be a court or persona designata. Though the Claims Tribunal is invested with the status different from a civil court, it undoubtedly possesses all the attributes of the court and for all intents and purposes it is a civil court.
Madras High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 20 - Full Document

Rajasthan State Road Transport ... vs Smt. Poonam Pahwa And Ors on 9 July, 1997

Application of underlying principles of C. P. Code has also been made in the decisions in Amarjit Kaur Vs. Vanguard Insurance Co. Ltd. (1969 ACJ 286), Jai Singh Vs. V.N.A. Subramaniam (1983 ACJ 1), M/s South Indian Insurance Co. Vs. Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, J & K & Other (AIR 1973 JK 38), New India Assurance Co. Vs. Punjab Roadways (AIR 1964 Pubjab 235), Bihar Cooperative Motor Vehicles Insurance Society Vs. Rameshwar Raut (AIR 1970 Patna 172), and Madras Motor and General Insurance Co. Vs. K. Gopala Mudaliar (1972 ACJ 135 Madras).
Supreme Court of India Cites 40 - Cited by 48 - G N Ray - Full Document
1   2 Next