Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 13 (0.27 seconds)The Banking Regulation Act, 1949
Section 22 in The Banking Regulation Act, 1949 [Entire Act]
Section 23 in The Banking Regulation Act, 1949 [Entire Act]
Article 21 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 11 in The Banking Regulation Act, 1949 [Entire Act]
Section 36 in The Banking Regulation Act, 1949 [Entire Act]
Union Of India vs United India Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors on 22 October, 1997
Mr. Lalit relied upon the case of Union of India v. United India Insurance
Co. Ltd., reported in [1997] 8 SCC 683 This was a case where a bus, whilst
crossing a unmanned railway crossing, was hit by a train. As a result
thereof 40 passengers and the driver were killed - and many other
passengers were injured. A large number of claims were filed before the
Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. The Tribunal in some of those cases held
that the driver of the bus was negligent and passed awards against the
owner of the bus and the Insurance Company. The Tribunal dismissed the
claims against the Railways on the ground that there was no negligence on
the part of the driver of the railway engine or on the part of the Railway
administration. On Appeals, the High Court held that the Railways were also
liable.
Section 13 in The Railways Act, 1989 [Entire Act]
Smt. Nilabati Behera Alias Lalit Behera ... vs State Of Orissa And Ors on 24 March, 1993
Mr. Lalit also relied upon the case of Nilabati Behera v. State of Orissa,
reported in [1993] 2 SCC 746. He submitted that it has been held in this
case that the award of compensation in a proceeding under Article 32 or
Article 226 is a remedy available in public law, based on strict liability
for contravention of fundamental rights to which the principle of sovereign
immunity did not apply, even though it may be available as a defence in
private law in an action based on tort.