Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 28 (0.34 seconds)
Shourya Khosla vs Mejor Singh on 27 October, 2023 cites

T. O. Anthony vs Karvarnan And Others on 1 February, 2008

22.5 Applying the ratio of afore cited judgements of T. O. Anthony vs Karvarnan And Others (supra) and Khenyei vs New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and Ors (supra) to the facts of the present case, it can be safely concluded that both the tortfeasors, that is, driver, owner and insurance company of Eicher Tempo bearing registration No.UP15-AT-8825 and driver, owner and the insurance company of Maruti Celerio Car bearings registration No.DL12-CH-2569 are jointly and severally liable to pay entire compensation amount to LR's of deceased Rahul Khosla.
Supreme Court of India Cites 0 - Cited by 425 - K G Balakrishnan - Full Document

Syad Akbar vs State Of Karnataka on 25 July, 1979

Shourya Khosla Vs. Major Singh Shourya Khosla Vs. Major Singh 57 12.13 In the light of afore cited opinion expressed by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the decided cases of Ravi Kapur vs State Of Rajasthan(supra) and Sayad Akbar vs. State of Karnataka(supra) as well as in the light of opinion expressed by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the decided cases of National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Gita Bindal & Ors.(supra), it can be safely concluded that although in certain cases there may be no reliable eye witness available to depose on the factum of negligence of the driver of the offending vehicle, however, the accident speaks for itself and appears to have occurred in such a manner that it could not have happened except for the reason of negligence of the driver under whose management and care the vehicle was being plied on the road at the time of occurrence of the alleged accident. 12.14 In the present case also, the vehicle of the victims had got rammed into the back side of a Tata Tempo truck and had got damaged to such an extent that the front body of the car of the victims had gone underneath the offending tempo and bonnet as well as the steering wheel and front seats of the said car had got completely crushed whereas the back wind screen of the car in question had been completely damaged thereby exposing back seat due to the impact of collision as is reflected from the photographs Ex.PW5/R3W1/1 to 7. The condition of the vehicle of the victims is sufficient to establish that it had struck against a stationary vehicle and not rammed into a moving vehicle. Therefore, defence propounded by the respondent to the effect that the offending tempo was moving at speed of 40 kmph stands demolished from the fact that condition of the car of the victims was such that no prudent person would arrive at a finding to the effect that the said car had collided against a moving vehicle. Even if the car of the victims was descending from a flyover at a very high speed, then also the same would not have gone underneath the offending tempo and got completely crushed under its body if the said tempo was in moving condition.
Supreme Court of India Cites 13 - Cited by 525 - R S Sarkaria - Full Document

Khenyei vs New India Assurnace Co.Ltd.& Ors on 7 May, 2015

22.5 Applying the ratio of afore cited judgements of T. O. Anthony vs Karvarnan And Others (supra) and Khenyei vs New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and Ors (supra) to the facts of the present case, it can be safely concluded that both the tortfeasors, that is, driver, owner and insurance company of Eicher Tempo bearing registration No.UP15-AT-8825 and driver, owner and the insurance company of Maruti Celerio Car bearings registration No.DL12-CH-2569 are jointly and severally liable to pay entire compensation amount to LR's of deceased Rahul Khosla.
Supreme Court of India Cites 15 - Cited by 600 - A Mishra - Full Document

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Satinder Kaur @ Satwinder Kaur And Ors. on 30 June, 2020

3093-3099 of 2020, decided on 07.09.2020 and United India Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Satinder Kaur alias Satvinder Kaur and Ors., (2020) SCC Online 410, no amount of Shourya Khosla Vs. Major Singh Shourya Khosla Vs. Major Singh 69 compensation can be awarded under the said head of 'loss of love and affection'. Hence, no amount is being granted under the said head.
Supreme Court of India Cites 16 - Cited by 1453 - I Malhotra - Full Document

National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Gita Bindal & Ors. on 12 October, 2012

Shourya Khosla Vs. Major Singh Shourya Khosla Vs. Major Singh 57 12.13 In the light of afore cited opinion expressed by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the decided cases of Ravi Kapur vs State Of Rajasthan(supra) and Sayad Akbar vs. State of Karnataka(supra) as well as in the light of opinion expressed by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the decided cases of National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Gita Bindal & Ors.(supra), it can be safely concluded that although in certain cases there may be no reliable eye witness available to depose on the factum of negligence of the driver of the offending vehicle, however, the accident speaks for itself and appears to have occurred in such a manner that it could not have happened except for the reason of negligence of the driver under whose management and care the vehicle was being plied on the road at the time of occurrence of the alleged accident. 12.14 In the present case also, the vehicle of the victims had got rammed into the back side of a Tata Tempo truck and had got damaged to such an extent that the front body of the car of the victims had gone underneath the offending tempo and bonnet as well as the steering wheel and front seats of the said car had got completely crushed whereas the back wind screen of the car in question had been completely damaged thereby exposing back seat due to the impact of collision as is reflected from the photographs Ex.PW5/R3W1/1 to 7. The condition of the vehicle of the victims is sufficient to establish that it had struck against a stationary vehicle and not rammed into a moving vehicle. Therefore, defence propounded by the respondent to the effect that the offending tempo was moving at speed of 40 kmph stands demolished from the fact that condition of the car of the victims was such that no prudent person would arrive at a finding to the effect that the said car had collided against a moving vehicle. Even if the car of the victims was descending from a flyover at a very high speed, then also the same would not have gone underneath the offending tempo and got completely crushed under its body if the said tempo was in moving condition.
Delhi High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 87 - J R Midha - Full Document
1   2 3 Next