Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 16 (1.54 seconds)
Shiv Kumar (Dar) vs Shzaaz (Fir No. 401/22, Ps. S.J. ... on 28 April, 2025 cites

Shiv Kumar Chadha Etc. Etc vs Municipal Corporation Of Delhi And Ors on 4 May, 1993

31. As per the discharge summary, the petitioner was diagnosed with B/L NOE, LEFT ZMC, MIDALATAL SPLIT FRACTURE. The injured remained admitted in JPN Apex Trauma Centre, AIIMS from 26.10.2022 to 31.10.2022. The injuries on the person of the petitioner were grievous in nature. Looking into the injuries and treatment of the petitioner, I award Petition No. : 64/23 Page No.12/18 Shiv Kumar vs. Shzaad and ors.
Supreme Court of India Cites 39 - Cited by 482 - N P Singh - Full Document

Smt. Kaushnuma Begum And Ors vs The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. And Ors on 3 January, 2001

19. It is a settled legal position that while deciding a petition u/s 166 of the M V Act, the Claims Tribunal has to decide negligence on the touchstone of preponderance of probabilities. Reference in this regard is made to the observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Kaushnumma Begum and Others v/s New India Assurance Company Limited, 2001 ACJ 421 SC, wherein it was held that the issue of wrongful act or omission on the part of the driver of motor vehicle involved in the accident is of secondary importance and mere use or involvement of motor vehicle in causing bodily injuries or death Petition No. : 64/23 Page No.8/18 Shiv Kumar vs. Shzaad and ors.
Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 2652 - Full Document

Rajesh Tyagi & Ors. vs Jaibir Singh & Ors. on 8 January, 2021

• The bank is also directed to get the nomination form filled by the claimant at the time of preparation of FDRs. • The bank is also directed to keep the money received from the respondents in an FDR in the name of the bank till the FDRs are prepared in the name of the claimant, so that the benefit of better interest may be given to the claimant for the said period. • The Manager, State Bank of India, District Court Saket branch is directed not to release any amount to the petitioner from this branch, unless ordered by the Tribunal in terms of the order of the Hon'ble High Court in FAO No. 842/2003 and CM Applications No. 32859/2017, 41125-41127/2017 in Rajesh Tyagi & Ors. vs. Jaibir Singh & Ors. dated 09.03.2018. It is made clear that the amount including the maturity amount of the FDRs shall be released to the petitioner through RTGS/NEFT directly in the personal bank account of the petitioner of the bank nearest to his place of residence, the details of which have been given by the petitioner to the Tribunal and same details shall be given by them to the Manager SBI, District Court Saket branch.
Delhi High Court Cites 64 - Cited by 1363 - J R Midha - Full Document
1   2 Next