Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 11 (1.01 seconds)
The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., vs Smt Nandini Mukherjee on 6 August, 2024 cites

Manager, National Insurance Co.Ltd vs Saju P.Paul & Anr on 3 January, 2013

19. With regard to the Tribunal's finding that the deceased was not a gratuitous passenger, learned counsel appearing for the respondent insurance company had contended that the Tribunal erred by not considering the deceased as a gratuitous passenger. Even if such a contention were to be accepted, it would not disentitle the petitioners from getting compensated, in light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Manuara Khatun (supra), which had placed reliance on Manager, National Insurance Company Limited vs. Saju P. Paul & Anr 5, wherein the direction to the insurance company was to pay the compensation and recover the same from the insured. Section 147(1) of the MV Act states as follows:
Supreme Court of India Cites 22 - Cited by 349 - R M Lodha - Full Document

National Insurance Co. Ltd vs Pranay Sethi on 31 October, 2017

23. The Tribunal awarded Rs.1,00,000/- to the petitioners towards love and affection and Rs.20,000/- towards funeral expenses which needs to modified. As per the decision of the Apex Court in National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi (supra), petitioners are entitled to a sum of Rs.36,300/- (Rs.15,000/- +Rs.15,000/- +10%+10%) towards loss of estate and funeral expenses.
Supreme Court of India Cites 32 - Cited by 9815 - D Misra - Full Document

National Insurance Co. Ltd vs Kaushalaya Devi & Ors on 13 May, 2008

15) The aforesaid question, in our opinion, remains no more res integra. As we notice, it was subject matter of several decisions of this Court rendered by three Judge Bench and two Judge Bench in past, viz., National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Baljit Kaur & Ors., (2004) 2 SCC 1, National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Challa Upendra Rao & Ors., (2004) 8 SCC 517, National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Kaushalaya Devi & Ors., (2008) 8 SCC 246, National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Roshan 1 2017 (4) SCC 796 6 Lal, [Order dated 19.1.2007 in SLP© No. 5699 of 2006], and National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Parvathneni & Anr., (2009) 8 SCC 785.
Supreme Court of India Cites 13 - Cited by 112 - S B Sinha - Full Document

National Insurance Co.Ltd vs Parvathneni & Anr on 31 August, 2009

15) The aforesaid question, in our opinion, remains no more res integra. As we notice, it was subject matter of several decisions of this Court rendered by three Judge Bench and two Judge Bench in past, viz., National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Baljit Kaur & Ors., (2004) 2 SCC 1, National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Challa Upendra Rao & Ors., (2004) 8 SCC 517, National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Kaushalaya Devi & Ors., (2008) 8 SCC 246, National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Roshan 1 2017 (4) SCC 796 6 Lal, [Order dated 19.1.2007 in SLP© No. 5699 of 2006], and National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Parvathneni & Anr., (2009) 8 SCC 785.
Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 206 - Full Document

United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Shimla vs Tilak Singh And Ors on 4 April, 2006

16. The learned counsel for respondent Insurance Company relied upon the judgment of this Court in M.A.C.M.A No.670 of 2021 decided on 08.06.2022 with regard to an Act policy wherein the respondent Insurance Company relied upon the judgment of the Apex Court in United India Insurance 10 Company Limited Vs. Tilak Singh and others 3;wherein it was held that:
Supreme Court of India Cites 20 - Cited by 611 - Full Document

Sarla Verma & Ors vs Delhi Transport Corp.& Anr on 15 April, 2009

deduction, the deceased's contribution would be Rs.2,80,005.50ps [Rs.5,60,011/- (minus) Rs.2,80,005.50ps], rounded off to Rs.2,80,006/-. Since the age of the deceased was 23 years at the time of the accident, the Tribunal rightly considered the multiplier as '18' as per the decision of the Apex Court reported in Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation 8. Adopting multiplier '18', the total loss of dependency comes to Rs.2,80,006 x 18 = Rs.50,40,108/-.
Supreme Court of India Cites 12 - Cited by 20141 - R V Raveendran - Full Document

M/S. National Insurance Co. Ltd vs Baljit Kaur And Ors on 6 January, 2004

15) The aforesaid question, in our opinion, remains no more res integra. As we notice, it was subject matter of several decisions of this Court rendered by three Judge Bench and two Judge Bench in past, viz., National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Baljit Kaur & Ors., (2004) 2 SCC 1, National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Challa Upendra Rao & Ors., (2004) 8 SCC 517, National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Kaushalaya Devi & Ors., (2008) 8 SCC 246, National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Roshan 1 2017 (4) SCC 796 6 Lal, [Order dated 19.1.2007 in SLP© No. 5699 of 2006], and National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Parvathneni & Anr., (2009) 8 SCC 785.
Supreme Court of India Cites 12 - Cited by 713 - V N Khare - Full Document
1   2 Next