Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 13 (2.31 seconds)The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
The Fatal Accidents Act, 1855
Channappa Channaveerappa Katti vs Laxman Bhimappa Bajentri And Ors. on 26 June, 1978
The learned counsel further pointed out that the said ruling in Channappa's case, is relied upon by a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in Nasibdar Suba Fakir v. Adhia and Co. , as well as by the High Court of Orissa is Oriental Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Narayanibai, . Relying on these decisions, the learned counsel submitted that since in the instant case the passengers carried in the tanker were fare-paying passengers the insurance company has to indemnify the owner by paying the compensation.
T.M. Renukappa vs Fahmida And Ors. on 20 March, 1979
20. This decision is followed by this court in the case of T. M. Renukappa v. Fahmida, .
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Gangamma And Anr. Etc. on 14 August, 1981
The ruling is further reiterated in Nagappayya v. New India Assurance Co. [1981] 2 KLJ 450 and in United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Gangamma, AIR 1982 Kar 261; [1982] ACJ 357.
Nasibdar Suba Fakir vs Adhia And Company And Ors. on 25 January, 1983
The learned counsel further pointed out that the said ruling in Channappa's case, is relied upon by a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in Nasibdar Suba Fakir v. Adhia and Co. , as well as by the High Court of Orissa is Oriental Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Narayanibai, . Relying on these decisions, the learned counsel submitted that since in the instant case the passengers carried in the tanker were fare-paying passengers the insurance company has to indemnify the owner by paying the compensation.
Oriental Fire And General Insurance ... vs Smt. Narayanibai And Ors. on 10 August, 1983
The learned counsel further pointed out that the said ruling in Channappa's case, is relied upon by a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in Nasibdar Suba Fakir v. Adhia and Co. , as well as by the High Court of Orissa is Oriental Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Narayanibai, . Relying on these decisions, the learned counsel submitted that since in the instant case the passengers carried in the tanker were fare-paying passengers the insurance company has to indemnify the owner by paying the compensation.
Section 96 in The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
Pushpabai Purshottam Udeshi & Ors vs Ranjit Ginning & Pressing Co. (P) Ltd. & ... on 25 March, 1977
The Bench in Pushpabai's case , consisted of two judges, whereas the Bench in State Bank of India's case, , consisted of three judges. Therefore, it is obvious that the ruling given in the later case prevails and it is obvious that even if the act committed by a servant in the course of his employment amounts to criminal act, the master would be held liable vicariously.