Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 4 of 4 (0.16 seconds)United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Hetalbhai C. Bagadia And Ors. on 4 March, 1999
Applying
the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of
Shankarayya v. United India Insurance Company Limited (supra) as
well as decision of this Court in case of United India Insurance
Company Limited v. Hetalbhai C. Bagadia & Ors. (supra) to
the facts of the instant case, there is no written permission
obtained by the Insurance Company to contest the claim case under
Section 170 of the Act. Therefore, merely, just because the
Advocate of the Insurance Company has cross-examined the claimants'
witnesses on merits, it cannot be inferred that the Tribunal has
passed reasoned order permitting the Insurance Company to avail of a
larger defence on merits under the statutory provisions of Section
170 of the Act.
Shankarayya And Anr. vs United India Insurance Co. Ltd. And Anr. on 16 January, 1998
Applying
the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of
Shankarayya v. United India Insurance Company Limited (supra) as
well as decision of this Court in case of United India Insurance
Company Limited v. Hetalbhai C. Bagadia & Ors. (supra) to
the facts of the instant case, there is no written permission
obtained by the Insurance Company to contest the claim case under
Section 170 of the Act. Therefore, merely, just because the
Advocate of the Insurance Company has cross-examined the claimants'
witnesses on merits, it cannot be inferred that the Tribunal has
passed reasoned order permitting the Insurance Company to avail of a
larger defence on merits under the statutory provisions of Section
170 of the Act.
Section 173 in The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
1