Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.17 seconds)
Shiv Mangal Singh Rajawat vs Rahul Sharma on 18 July, 2025 cites

Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd vs Zaharulnisha & Ors on 29 April, 2008

10. The factual aspects in this case are similar as was in Zaharulnisha (supra); therefore, the Insurance Company is not liable to pay the compensation amount to the claimant. However, it is under obligation to pay the compensation amount to the claimant and shall thereafter be entitled to recover it from the owner and driver of the offending vehicle. The conclusion of the learned Tribunal on Issue No. 4 does not warrant interference. However, the order of 'pay and recover' is appropriate in this case.
Supreme Court of India Cites 20 - Cited by 183 - L S Panta - Full Document

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

22. In the result, the appeal is allowed to the limited extent and it is directed that the appellant Insurance Company though not liable to pay the amount of compensation, but in the nature of this case it shall satisfy the award and shall have the right to recover the amount deposited by it along with interest from the owner of the vehicle viz. Respondent 8, particularly in view of the fact that no appeal was preferred by him nor has he chosen to appear before this Court to contest this appeal. This direction is given in the light of the judgments of this Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Baljit Kaur [(2004) 2 SCC 1 : 2004 SCC (Cri) 370] and Deddappa v. National Insurance Co. Ltd. [(2008) 2 SCC 595 : (2008) 1 SCC (Cri) 517]."
Supreme Court of India Cites 12 - Cited by 713 - V N Khare - Full Document

Ram Bhagat Goutam vs Jethanand Harwani And Ors. on 1 May, 2007

In case of Ram Bhagat Goutam (Supra) , it was held by the Division Bench of this Court that the driver was holding a LMV licence but was driving a motorcycle. It was observed that LMV license requires higher driving responsibility than a motor cycle licence and that the owner had reason to believe the driver was competent as he held an LMV Licence. Therefore, held that this was not a substantial breach of policy conditions by the owner, and the insurer was held jointly and severally liable with the driver and owner of the vehicle for paying compensation to the claimant.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 9 - Cited by 0 - A Mishra - Full Document
1