Karnataka High Court Passes Judgment in Multiple Motor Accident Claim Appeals
22 Dec 2020...
Search Results for "Market Risk"
530 result(s) found
Found 530 result(s)
High Court
High Court of Karnataka Kalaburagi Bench Hears Batch of Writ Petitions Challenging Amendments to Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing Act. Petitioners Seek Declaration that Deletion of 'Trader' from Section 72 and Insertion of Rule 76-A are Unconstitutional.
12 Oct 2017The present proceedings comprised a batch of writ petitions filed before the High Court of Karnataka, Kalaburagi Bench, under Articles 226 and 227 of ...
- 39
High Court
High Court of Bombay Considers Second Appeals in RERA Delayed Possession Matter. Builder Challenges Appellate Tribunal's Direction to Pay Interest at 10.05% p.a. from February 2014.
8 Jun 2026These Second Appeals were filed before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay by Runwal Constructions, a registered partnership firm, challenging the ...
- 63
High Court
High Court of Karnataka Allows Owner's Appeal in Motor Accident Claim — Insurance Company Held Liable to Pay Compensation Despite Absence of Valid Driving Licence. The court held that the insurance company is liable to pay compensation to third parties even if there is a breach of policy conditions, with a right to recover from the insured.
23 Nov 2020The present appeal was filed by the owner of a tractor and trailer (appellants) challenging the judgment and award dated 09.12.2011 passed by the I Ad...
- 115
High Court
Bombay High Court Upholds Interim Injunction in Trade Mark Infringement Suit — 'SUPER MOR CHHAP' Held Deceptively Similar to 'MOR CHHAP'. Registration and Prior Use of 'MOR CHHAP' for Lime Plaster Entitled Plaintiff to Protection Under Trade and Merchandise Act, 1958.
30 Sep 2016The plaintiff, Sunil Manikchand Kasliwal, filed a suit for trade mark infringement against the defendant, Rahul Uttam Suryavanshi, alleging that the d...
- 100
High Court
Bombay High Court Dismisses Passing Off Injunction in Pharmaceutical Trademark Dispute Due to Delay and Acquiescence. Similarity of marks alone insufficient for interim relief when defendant has used its registered mark for nearly a decade without evidence of confusion.
15 Mar 2017The plaintiff, Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd, filed a suit for trademark infringement and passing off against Wockhardt Ltd and Overseas African Remedie...
- 76
High Court
Bombay High Court Allows Appeal for Enhanced Compensation in Land Acquisition Case — Market Value Fixed at Rs. 1,00,000 per Hectare Based on Comparable Sale Instance. The court held that the sale instance dated 20.4.1988, just two months before the Section 4 notification, was the best comparable and after deducting 1/3rd for development, the market value was Rs. 1,00,000 per hectare.
12 Jan 2010The appellant, Shahadeo s/o Shriram Hingane, owned land bearing Gat No.25 in village Warkhed, Taluka Shegaon, District Buldhana. By a notification dat...
- 63
High Court
Bombay High Court Grants Injunction in Trademark Infringement Case: 'ROFOL' vs 'PROFOL'. Prior Registration of 'ROFOL' by Plaintiff in 1992 Entitles Injunction Against Defendant's Deceptively Similar Mark 'PROFOL' Under Section 29 of Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958.
31 Mar 2012The plaintiff, M/s. Neon Laboratories Limited, filed a suit for infringement and passing off against the defendants, M/s. Medical Technologies Ltd. an...
- 72
High Court
High Court of Karnataka Allows Insurance Company's Appeal in Motor Accident Claim — Reduces Compensation Due to Contributory Negligence and Lack of Proof of Income. Claimants failed to establish negligence of driver and income of deceased, leading to reduction in award.
25 Nov 2022The case involves multiple appeals arising from a motor accident claim. The accident occurred on 10.02.2014 when a motorcycle ridden by Devarajegowda ...
- 84
High Court
High Court of Karnataka Allows Insurance Company's Appeal and Dismisses Claimant's Appeal in Motor Accident Claim — Compensation Reduced Due to Contributory Negligence and Lack of Proof of Income. The court held that the claimant, a pillion rider, was guilty of contributory negligence for not wearing a helmet and that the income assessed by the Tribunal was excessive without evidence.
4 Nov 2024The case involves two appeals arising from a motor accident claim. The claimant, Muniyappa, was a pillion rider on a motorcycle that met with an accid...
- 114
