Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 13 (0.20 seconds)Section 168 in The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
Section 173 in The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
Section 149 in The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
Jaswant Rao vs Kamlabai And Anr. on 21 June, 1990
2. When the appeal came up for admission. I entertained doubt if it could be admitted as the appellant is required as per Section 173 to make deposit of Rs. 25,000/- or 50% of the amount awarded, whichever is less. In the instant case, claimant/respondent No. 1 has been awarded Rs. 7,500/-. Although my attention was drawn to this Court's decision in Jaswant Rao v. Kamlabai , rendered at the Indore Bench and it was pointed out that the impugned awarded being passed on 10-1 -1989, no deposit need be made as the new act came into force only from a chain of other decisions of this Court of the scope of Section 6, General Clauses Act, 1897 (referred in Section 217(4) of the Act). But, all those decisions have been overruled recently in Babulal's .
Section 92A in Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 [Entire Act]
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Lakshmi on 17 January, 1990
Shri Khot cited also Madras High Court's D.B. decision in United India Insurance Co. v. Lakshmi but the law laid down therein is of no relevance to the controversy mooted. In that case, it was held that in case of an accident between two trucks, the Insurer had no liability for death of the owner of one of the trucks in which he was travelling even though there was negligence of the driver of that truck resulting in the accident and his employer's death. Because, Insurer's liability under Section 95(1) of the old Act was "third party liability" only.