Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (0.33 seconds)
Susan V.Johan & Ors. vs Joy Markose And Anr. on 26 November, 2014 cites

Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd vs Rajni Devi & Ors on 22 April, 2008

(2009) 13 SCC 710 and Oriental Insurance Company Limited vs. Rajni Devi and Others, (2008) 5 SCC 736 held that in facts similar to the present one that the deceased would step into the shoes of the owner and hence a compensation petition would not lie under section 163A of the M.V.Act by the claimants. The said judgment would be applicable to the facts of the present case.
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 317 - S B Sinha - Full Document

National Insurance Co.Ltd vs Om Prakash Jain on 14 September, 2009

In those judgments also it was noted that the issue alongwith various other issues is pending adjudication before the Supreme Court in a Special Leave Petition titled as National Insurance Company vs. Jai Prakash. However, liberty was granted to the claimants to approach the Tribunal again in case any different view is taken by the Supreme Court which is beneficial to the claimants on the interpretation of section 163-A of the M.V.Act.
Supreme Court of India Cites 2 - Cited by 45 - Full Document

National Insurance Co. Ltd vs Laxmi Narain Dhut on 2 March, 2007

13. The Supreme Court further noted the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Laxmi Narain Dhut 2007 ACJ 721 where the Supreme Court held that dispute like the one now sought to be raised by learned counsel for the appellant, namely, that under the accident clause owner would be entitled to compensation of Rs.2 lacs.. which has to be adjudicated upon by a different forum other than the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. However, the Supreme Court in exercise of powers under Article 142 of the Constitution directed as follows:-
Supreme Court of India Cites 26 - Cited by 573 - A Pasayat - Full Document
1