Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 12 (0.23 seconds)
Vikash vs Vikram Singh And Ors on 23 September, 2023 cites

Rajesh Tyagi & Ors. vs Jaibir Singh & Ors. on 8 January, 2021

(MACT No.696/17) Vikash Vs. Vikram Singh & Ors. 24 Accordingly, the Manager, SBI, District Courts Complex, Dwarka, Sector­10, New Delhi is directed to transfer the above­said cash amounts to the above­said saving bank account of the above­said petitioner after due verification and as per rules and to keep the remaining amount in the form of above­ mentioned FDRs in terms of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Annuity Deposit (MACAD) Scheme formulated vide orders dated 01.5.2018 and 07.12.2018 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in FAO No. 842/2013 (Rajesh Tyagi & Ors. Vs. Jaibir Singh & Ors.).
Delhi High Court Cites 64 - Cited by 1363 - J R Midha - Full Document

National Insurance Company Ltd. vs Smt. Pushpa Rana And Ors. on 20 December, 2007

Even otherwise, while determining the negligence, reliance can be placed upon the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in 2009 ACJ 287, National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pushpa Rana wherein the Hon'ble High Court has held that in case the petitioner files the certified copy of the criminal record showing the completion of the investigation by the police or the issuance of charge sheet under section 279/304 A IPC or the certified copy of the FIR in addition to recovery memo and (MACT No.696/17) Vikash Vs. Vikram Singh & Ors. 10 mechanical inspection report of the offending vehicle, these documents are sufficient proof to reach at the conclusion that the driver was negligent. It was further held that the proceedings under the Motor Vehicles Act are not akin to the proceedings in a civil suit and hence strict rules of evidence are not required to be followed in this regard.
Delhi High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 4796 - K Gambhir - Full Document

Smt. Kaushnuma Begum And Ors vs The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. And Ors on 3 January, 2001

Further, in Kaushnumma Begum and others v/s New India Assurance Company Limited, 2001 ACJ 421 SC, it was held that the issue of wrongful act or omission on the part of driver of the motor vehicle involved in the accident is of secondary importance and mere use or involvement of motor vehicle in causing bodily injuries or death to a human being or damage to property would make the petition maintainable under section 166 and 140 of the Act.
Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 2652 - Full Document
1   2 Next