Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.42 seconds)
National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Ningamma And Ors. on 8 February, 1996 cites

Oriental General Insurance Co. vs Rukmini Bai on 16 January, 1992

8. There was some controversy on the question as to whether a person who is in the process of aligthing from the vehicle when the accident takes place could be construed to be a passenger or a third party. This question has been set at rest by a Division Bench ruling of this Court in ORIENTAL GENERAL INSURANCE CO. vs. RUKMINI BAI, . In that judgment this Court has observed that under Section 95(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, every insurance policy is bound to cover risk in respect of death or bodily injury to persons being carried in or entering or mounting or alighting from the vehicle at the time of the occurrence of the event out of which the claim arises. While holding that a person who was alighting from the bus at the time of the accident must be held to be a passenger, and as pointed out that if really the claimant had already alighted from the bus and thereafter the accident had occurred the contention that the claimant had ceased to be a passenger would have been unexceptionable. This judgment also shows that it is only if the deceased or the injured was travelling or was alighting from the bus at the time of the accident he or she must be treated to be a passenger and if he or she had already alighted at the time of the accident or was outside the vehicle, then he or she cannot be considered to be a passenger. The fact that the deceased had not reached the destination or that he had got down at the intermediary stop would not be relevant to find out whether he was a passenger or a third party at the time of the accident.
Karnataka High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 9 - Full Document

Pandit Ram Saroop And Anr. vs Balbir Singh And Ors. on 8 September, 1987

In PANDIT RAM SAROOP AND ANR. vs. BALBIR SINGH AND ORS., 1988 A.C.J. 500, the deceased who was a passenger was killed when he was getting down from the vehicle on account of the fact that the vehicle was moved negligently. It was contended that he must be deemed to be a passenger for the purpose of restricting the liability of the insurer. The deceased could not get down at his destination as the vehicle was not stopped there and he was getting down at next stop. The Delhi High Court held that the character of the deceased as passenger came to an end at the destination stop and that he cannot be considered to be a passenger when he was getting down from the vehicle. In that case the question as to whether a person who had got down at an intermediary stage before reaching the destination and who was outside the vehicle when the accident took place can be considered to be a passenger or a third party had not arisen for consideration. As such that decision cannot be of much help to the appellant.
Delhi High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 12 - Full Document

National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Asha Lata Rout And Ors. on 1 October, 1993

In NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. vs. ASHALATA ROUT AND ORS., 1994 A.C.J. 1137 the deceased who was a passenger in the bus, which had got stuck at a level crossing, on seeing an approaching train got down from the bus and had run away some fifty feet. At that time the train collided with the bus and the bus capsized and fell on the deceased resulting in his death. It was contended on behalf of the insurer of the bus that the deceased would continue to be a passenger until destination of the bus was reached and that the liability of the insurer was limited. The Orissa High Court has negatived that contention and has held that when the deceased had got down from the bus it is difficult to interfere with the finding of the Tribunal that he was no longer a passenger of the bus.
Orissa High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 3 - G B Patnaik - Full Document
1