Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.31 seconds)The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
Kaushalendra Kumar Mishra vs The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. on 16 February, 2012
In support of his case, the State Commission has placed reliance upon
the order of this Commission in the case of Kaushalendra Kumar Mishra v.
Oriental Insurance Company Limited, I (2012) CPJ 559. Consequently, there
was violation of Section 39 of the Motor Vehicles Act.
Niranjan Kumar Yadav vs National Insurance Co. Ltd. on 29 March, 2011
24. Niranjan Kumar Yadav vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd., II (2011) CPJ 64
(NC), esa ekuuh; jk"Vªh; vk;ksx }kjk vfHkfu/kkZfjr fd;k x;k gS fd %&
"4................ On the contention of the present revision petitioner that the
registration was already applied for and was pending with the registering
authority, the State Commission has made the following categorical
observations :-
Narinder Singh vs New India Assurance Company Ltd And Ors on 4 September, 2014
21. Narinder Singh vs. New India Assurance Company Limited & Others II (2013)CPJ
20 A (NC) esa ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; }kjk vfHkfu/kkZfjr fd;k x;k gS fd
%&
"14. Indisputably, a temporary registration was granted in respect of
vehicle in question, which had expired on 11.1.2006 and the alleged accident took
place on 2.2.2006 when the vehicle was without registration. Nothing has been
brought on record by the appellant to show that before or after 11.1.2006, when
the period of temporary registration expired, the appellant owner of the vehicle
either applied for permanent registration as contemplated under Section 39 of the
Act or made any application for extension of period as temporary registration on the
ground of some special reasons. In our view, therefore, using a vehicle on the
public road without any registration is not only an offence punishable under Section
192 of the Motor Vehicles Act but also a fundamental breach of the terms and
conditions of the policy contract."
Section 2 in The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
Section 12 in The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
Ms. Saleena Rani vs United India Insurance Company ... on 8 December, 2014
25. Saleena Rani vs. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. & Another, I (2015) CPJ
220 (NC), esa ekuuh; jk"Vªh; vk;ksx }kjk vfHkfu/kkZfjr fd;k x;k gS fd %&
temporary registration was valid only for period of one month. The petitioner did
not get vehicle registered with concerned authority in accordance with provisions of
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Petitioner itself was at fault. After expiry of temporary
registration she did not apply before concerned authority in accordance with
provisions of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
Bhagwat vs Branch Manager, United India Insurance ... on 27 February, 2015
22. Bhagwat vs. The United India Insurance Company Limited, IV (2014) CPJ 698
(NC), esa ekuuh; jk"Vªh; vk;ksx }kjk vfHkfu/kkZfjr fd;k x;k gS fd
%&petitioner never applied before Regional Transport Officer for getting permanent
registration of the vehicle and for failure to meet statutory requirement regarding
registration of the vehicle, the complainant was not entitled to get claim even on
non-standard basis.
M/S. Iffco-Tokio Genral Insurance Co. ... vs Shri Pratap Bhagwan Patil on 7 May, 2013
[See also Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr. v. Pratap Bhagwan Patil, II
(2015) CPJ 739 (NC)].
1