Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.23 seconds)
Hdfc Ergo General Insruance Co. Ltd Thr vs Natthaaram on 9 May, 2018 cites

National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Santosh Kumar on 10 August, 2000

7- On a proper scrutiny of Section 166 of the Act with juxtaposition to Section 165 of the Act, it appears that sub section 1(b) of Section 166 of the Act refers to owner of the property and in the context of both the provisions, it would mean the Third Party and not Insured. Said aspect has been dealt with by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. (supra).
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 13 - D Misra - Full Document

General Manager, Kerala State Road ... vs K.P. Saradamma on 3 July, 1987

Division Bench of Kerala High Court also in the case of General Manager, Kerala State Road Transport Vs. K.P. Saradamma, AIR 1989 Kerala 23 enunciated the law in the same fashion. Therefore, it is clear that benefits of beneficial legislation having trappings of social healing on the basis of motor vehicle accident occurred, are not available to owner of the vehicle but to third party. Thus, in the present case, owner Nattharam cannot seek compensation because of accident of his own tractor by him. 11- Considering the fact situation, the Claims Tribunal erred in passing the impugned order, rejecting the application of the petitioner. Trial Court did not exercise the jurisdiction vested in it. Consequently, the petition preferred by the petitioner is hereby allowed and the impugned order dated 17-06-2016 is hereby set aside and the application under Section 169 of the Act read with Section 151 of CPC is allowed, consequent to which, claim petition preferred by the petitioner is hereby dismissed as not maintainable.
Kerala High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 22 - K G Balakrishnan - Full Document
1