Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (1.42 seconds)
Documents citing Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd vs Sukhwinder Kaur on 30 July, 2014

The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. ... vs Ravindra S/O Ananda Jadhav And Others on 29 November, 2019

4. The first objection is about addition on account of future prospects. It is urged that since the petition is under Section 163-A of the M.V. Act, claimants are not entitled for said addition, but the entitlement is only as per Second Schedule. In this regard, the appellant relied on the decision of this Court in case of Late Suman Vihswanath Chavan & ors. Vs. The Divisional Controller, Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation, Jalgaon decided on 29.10.2018 by this Court (Aurangabad Bench) . Besides that, on the same points, the appellant relied on the judgment delivered by different High Court in cases of (1) Cholamandalam MS General Insurance ::: Uploaded on - 29/11/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 30/11/2019 04:32:31 ::: Judgment 4 28FA1298.17 .odt Co. Ltd. Vs. Ankit Kumar and others, decided on 30.01.2019 by Punjab- Haryana High Court, (2) United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. R. Shanthy, decided on 04.02.2019 by the Madras High Court, (3) the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sukhveer Kaur and others, decided on 10.05.2019 by the Punjab and Haryana High Court, at Chandigarh, (4) National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Shooni and others, decided on 30.04.2019 by Punjab and Haryana High Court, at Chandigarh and (5) HDFC Ergo General Insurance Co. Vs. Panki Devi, decided on 30.05.2019 by Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur . In these cases, the different High Courts equally refused to make addition on account of future prospects in the petition under Section 163-A of the M. V. Act.
Bombay High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - V G Joshi - Full Document

B.Jaisoorya And Two Others vs D.Ramakrishna Reddy And Another on 20 October, 2014

The learned counsel for the petitioners/appellants argues that the Tribunal went wrong in not observing the material evidence on record. It is also his submission that the evidence of P.Ws 2 and 3 proves that the lorry driver was negligent. He relied upon the judgments of this Court in Saudagarsing Chhajusing v. Jashodaben , New India Assurance Co. Ltd. V. Maya Wati , Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd v. Surinder Kaur and National Insurance Co. Ltd. V. Y.S.Madhavi Latha .
Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana) Cites 12 - Cited by 1 - B C Kumar - Full Document

Sbi General Insurance Company Ltd ... vs Smt Kavita Sudhakar Waghmare And Others on 8 September, 2025

7. Reference can be made to the decisions delivered by different High Courts in the cases of (1) Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Ankit Kumar and others, decided on 30.01.2019 by Punjab Haryana High Court, (2) United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. R. Shanthy, decided on 04.02.2019 by the Madras High Court, (3) the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sukhveer Kaur and others, decided on 10.05.2019 by the Punjab and Haryana High Court, at Chandigarh, (4) National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Shooni and others, decided on 30.04.2019 by Punjab and Haryana High Court, at Chandigarh and (5) HDFC Ergo General Insurance Co. Vs. Panki Devi, decided on 30.05.2019 by Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur. In these cases, different High Courts have refused to make addition on account of future prospects in the petition under Section 163-A of the M. V. Act.
Bombay High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1