Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.20 seconds)
Munikrishna Murthy @ Munikrishna vs Abraham on 29 September, 2020 cites

Mounesh S/O Basavantappa vs Thimmanna S/O Muddanna Yerakamatti on 30 June, 2010

In reply to the arguments advanced by respondent No.2 - insurance company, the learned counsel for the appellant relies upon the judgment of this court reported in MANU/KA/0778/2011 in the case of The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Vs. Manjulamma and Others and brought to my notice paragraph 12 of the judgment, wherein this court has held that - "risk of workmen/loaders in a Tractor and Trailor is necessary to be covered u/s.147 of the Act as an Act policy without collecting any additional premium and the insurer would be -:9:- liable to pay the entire compensation amount in terms of the Act by relying upon the judgment rendered in Mounesh Vs. Thimmanna and Others [MANU/KA/1359/2010 : 2011 (1) KCCR 341]."
Karnataka High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 24 - Full Document

New India Assurance Co. Ltd vs M/S. Hira Lal Ramesh Chand & Ors on 13 June, 2008

MANU/KA/0659/2020 in the case of The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Vs. Ramesh and Others, and brought to the notice of this court paragraph 10 wherein this court has held that - "the evidence on record clearly indicated that the owner of the goods Basavarajappa had employed the claimants who were engaged in the business of loading and un-loading. In my view, the claimants thus would be the authorized representatives of the owner of the goods."
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 49 - R V Raveendran - Full Document

Kajal vs Jagdish Chand on 5 February, 2020

28. The doctor who has been examined as PW-2 has deposed categorically in his evidence that the claimant requires an attendant and also considering 100% disability and in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in (2020) 4 SCC 413 in the case of Kajal Vs. Jagdish Chand and Others, wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that - not only the court has to multiply the loss of future income of the injured who has suffered disability to the extent of 100%, the court has to assess the pecuniary damages other than loss of income applying the multiplier system but also the factors in the inflation rate, the rate of interest payable on the lump sum award, the longevity of the claimant and also other issues such as the uncertainties of life for determining the attendant charges to ensure the award is just compensation.
Supreme Court of India Cites 13 - Cited by 241 - D Gupta - Full Document

The New India Assurance Company Limited vs Smt Manjulamma on 11 July, 2011

In reply to the arguments advanced by respondent No.2 - insurance company, the learned counsel for the appellant relies upon the judgment of this court reported in MANU/KA/0778/2011 in the case of The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Vs. Manjulamma and Others and brought to my notice paragraph 12 of the judgment, wherein this court has held that - "risk of workmen/loaders in a Tractor and Trailor is necessary to be covered u/s.147 of the Act as an Act policy without collecting any additional premium and the insurer would be -:9:- liable to pay the entire compensation amount in terms of the Act by relying upon the judgment rendered in Mounesh Vs. Thimmanna and Others [MANU/KA/1359/2010 : 2011 (1) KCCR 341]."
Karnataka High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 1 - A N Gowda - Full Document
1