Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 22 (0.26 seconds)
Paramjit Kaur And Anr vs Partap Singh And Ors on 28 January, 2026 cites

Ravi vs Badrinarayan & Ors on 18 February, 2011

16. The contention regarding delay of one day in registration of the FIR is devoid of merit. It is settled law that delay in lodging the FIR is not fatal to a claim under the Motor Vehicles Act, particularly when the same stands satisfactorily explained. Reference in this regard can be made to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ravi v. Badrinarayan, 2011(4) SCC 693, wherein it has been held that delay in lodging of FIR should not be treated as fatal for motor accident claim proceedings, if the claimant is able to demonstrate satisfactorily and with cogent reasons for such delay. The relevant para is reproduced as under:-
Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 367 - D Verma - Full Document

Ningamma & Anr vs United India Insurance Co.Ltd on 13 May, 2009

12. Thus, the liability of the tractor/its insurer extended to the accident caused by the tractor resulting in the death of the deceased, through the trailer. This being the position in the present case, the principles emanating from the decisions where the Courts have held that the trailer has to be separately registered with the insurance company to make it liable, would not be applicable. To that extent, the facts in the present case are clearly distinguishable from the ones cited by learned counsel for the appellant. The legislation i.e., the MV Act, being beneficial and welfare-oriented in nature [Ningamma v United India Insurance Co. Ltd., (2009) 13 SCC 710; K Ramya v National Insurance Co. Ltd., 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1338, and; Shivaleela v Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd., 2025 SCC OnLine SC 563] and ultimately the root cause of the accident being the tractor, which was insured, this crucial fact cannot be lost sight of. For further clarification, we might illustrate: if an insured vehicle hits another vehicle which in turn hits a third vehicle, then for the entire chain 13 of 27 ::: Downloaded on - 02-02-2026 21:37:13 ::: FAO-5910 and 5944 of 2017 14 of accidents, the liability would pass on to the vehicle which was the root cause of the accident because it is the result of the action in the same chain of events which cannot be segregated or compartmentalized. Moreover, this Court is duty-bound to be mindful of the ground realities of our nation and cannot let practicality be overshadowed by technicality.
Supreme Court of India Cites 17 - Cited by 814 - M Sharma - Full Document

K. Ramya vs National Insurance Company Ltd. on 30 September, 2022

12. Thus, the liability of the tractor/its insurer extended to the accident caused by the tractor resulting in the death of the deceased, through the trailer. This being the position in the present case, the principles emanating from the decisions where the Courts have held that the trailer has to be separately registered with the insurance company to make it liable, would not be applicable. To that extent, the facts in the present case are clearly distinguishable from the ones cited by learned counsel for the appellant. The legislation i.e., the MV Act, being beneficial and welfare-oriented in nature [Ningamma v United India Insurance Co. Ltd., (2009) 13 SCC 710; K Ramya v National Insurance Co. Ltd., 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1338, and; Shivaleela v Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd., 2025 SCC OnLine SC 563] and ultimately the root cause of the accident being the tractor, which was insured, this crucial fact cannot be lost sight of. For further clarification, we might illustrate: if an insured vehicle hits another vehicle which in turn hits a third vehicle, then for the entire chain 13 of 27 ::: Downloaded on - 02-02-2026 21:37:13 ::: FAO-5910 and 5944 of 2017 14 of accidents, the liability would pass on to the vehicle which was the root cause of the accident because it is the result of the action in the same chain of events which cannot be segregated or compartmentalized. Moreover, this Court is duty-bound to be mindful of the ground realities of our nation and cannot let practicality be overshadowed by technicality.
Supreme Court of India Cites 15 - Cited by 19 - S Kant - Full Document

Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd vs Brij Mohan & Ors on 15 May, 2007

14. To our mind, the learned Judges in Dhondubhai (supra) did not lay down an absolute principle of law, but taking note of Oriental Insurance Co. Limited v Brij Mohan, (2007) 7 SCC 56, it was ordered that the 'respondent-Insurance Company shall pay the amount awarded by the High Court as compensation with the accrued interest and recover the same from the owner of the vehicle.'
Supreme Court of India Cites 18 - Cited by 319 - Full Document
1   2 3 Next