Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.19 seconds)Dhannalal vs D.P. Vijayvargiya & Ors on 7 May, 1996
17. So far as the ground of limitation is concerned, the learned counsel for the appellant has drawn my attention to the case of Dhannalal v. D.P. Vijayvargiya and Ors., I 1996 ACC 608 (SC), In which it was held by their Lordships of the Supreme Court that when Sub-section (3) of Section 166 has been omitted, then the Tribunal has to entertain a claim petition without taking note of the date on which the accident has taken place. The claim petitions cannot be thrown out on the ground that such claim petitions were barred by the when Sub-section (3) of Section 166 was in force.
The New India Assurance Co. Ltd vs C. Padma & Anr on 12 September, 2003
20. Learned counsel has also referred to the authorities with regard to limitations in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. C. Padma and Anr., 2003 (7) SCC 713, The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. v. Safi Mohd. @ Mohd. Safi and Ors., 2002 (4) WLC (Raj.) 262, R.L.W. 2003 (2) Raj. 1289.
Makbool Ahmed And Ors. vs Bhura Lal And Ors. on 2 April, 1985
21. So far as issues burden of proof, rash and negligent driving of the driver, contributory negligence and impleadment of driver as a necessary party, as well as liability of the insurance company are concerned, the learned counsel has referred to the decisions given in Smt. Chhotudi and Ors. v. Ganpat Ram and Anr., 1998 (2) T.A.C. 432 (Raj. 2), Kumar Mohamed Rafique (since deceased) by his heirs-appellants v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay, 11 (1986) ACC 42, Ram Pyari and Ors. v. Bharat Singh and Ors., II 1996 ACC 162, New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Jagannath Singh and Ors., 1995 ACJ 683, Shanti and Ors. v. Kastoora and Ors., 1988 (1) T.A.C. 548 and Makbool Ahmed and Ors. v. Bhura Lal and Ors., 1986 ACJ 219.
Section 304A in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
The Amending Act, 1897
Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. (The) vs Safi Mohd. @ Mohd. Safi And Ors. on 22 March, 2002
20. Learned counsel has also referred to the authorities with regard to limitations in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. C. Padma and Anr., 2003 (7) SCC 713, The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. v. Safi Mohd. @ Mohd. Safi and Ors., 2002 (4) WLC (Raj.) 262, R.L.W. 2003 (2) Raj. 1289.
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. vs Jagannath Singh And Ors. on 25 January, 1994
21. So far as issues burden of proof, rash and negligent driving of the driver, contributory negligence and impleadment of driver as a necessary party, as well as liability of the insurance company are concerned, the learned counsel has referred to the decisions given in Smt. Chhotudi and Ors. v. Ganpat Ram and Anr., 1998 (2) T.A.C. 432 (Raj. 2), Kumar Mohamed Rafique (since deceased) by his heirs-appellants v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay, 11 (1986) ACC 42, Ram Pyari and Ors. v. Bharat Singh and Ors., II 1996 ACC 162, New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Jagannath Singh and Ors., 1995 ACJ 683, Shanti and Ors. v. Kastoora and Ors., 1988 (1) T.A.C. 548 and Makbool Ahmed and Ors. v. Bhura Lal and Ors., 1986 ACJ 219.
1