Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.19 seconds)

Jaddoo Singh Alias Jagvir Singh And Anr. vs Smt. Malti Devi And Anr. on 26 July, 1982

3. Apart from the Judgment under appeal, we find that this view is supported by two Judgments of the Madras High Court and an earlier decision of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Two Division Benches of the Madras High Court have taken the view after discussing the law at length that the policy taken during any part of the day becomes operative from the commencement of that day. Besides these Judgments, a Division Bench decision of the Allahabad High Court in Jaddoo Singh v. Malti Devi 1983 ACJ 747 (Allahabad), supports this view on principle.
Allahabad High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 15 - K N Singh - Full Document

M/S. United India Insurance Company, ... vs Imman Aminasab Nadaf And Others on 30 November, 1989

2. Brief facts of the case are these:- Respondent No. 1 presented a claim petition under Section 110-D of the 1939 Act seeking compensation of Rs. 3,55,000/- towards death of her husband Kallappa in a motor accident. During the pendency of the said claim petition the 1st respondent made an application under Section 92A of the Act for awarding pompensation of Rs. 15,000/- on the basis of No Fault Liability. Before fixing no fault liability on the Insurance Company, according to the Full Bench Decision of this Court in UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY v. AMINASAB NADAF, the Tribunal is required to record findings on two issues:-
Karnataka High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 39 - Full Document

Smt. Asma Begum And Others vs Nisar Ahmed And Others on 8 November, 1989

In support of this contention, the learned Counsel relied on the Judgment of this Court in ASMA BEGUM v. NISAR AHMED. In the said case on facts it was established that the insurance premium was paid on 17-11-1983 at 11 A.M. and the policy was also issued to be effective from 17-11-1983 till 16-11-1984. On this basis it was contended for the Insurance Company that it did not cover the risk arising out of the accident which had taken place at 10 A.M. on 17-11 -1983. The relevant portion of the Judgment reads:-
Karnataka High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 16 - Full Document

New India Assurance Co. Ltd vs Ram Dayal And Ors on 20 April, 1990

5. Sri Ashok Kalyanshetty, the learned Counsel for the claimant, however, relied on the Judgment of the Supreme Court in NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. v. RAM DAYAL in which after noticing that the accident had taken place earlier in the morning and the Insurance Policy was taken after the commencement of the office hours in the after-noon, the Supreme Court held that as the date commenced immediately after the mid-night of the previous day ended, the policy covered the risk, notwithstanding the fact that the accident had occurred earlier. The relevant portion of the Judgment reads:-
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 121 - M Rangnath - Full Document

Jaikrishandas vs Chiruthai Ammal And Anr. on 10 November, 1983

In support of the contention of the claimant reliance was placed on the Decision in JAIKRISHANDAS v. CHRIRUTHAI AMMAL and ANR. In the said case after noticing that the policy had been obtained at 5.30 P.M. and the accident had occurred at 10.30 P.M. on 30th September 1986, rejecting the similar contention of the Insurance Company, the Court held that the risk was covered by the policy. Following the said Decision, the Tribunal held that notwithstanding the fact that the accident had taken place earlier, the Insurance Company was liable to pay the compensation. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant has presented this appeal.
Madras High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 4 - V Ramaswami - Full Document
1