Search Results for "negligent act"

2499 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 2499 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Allows Appeal in Workmen Compensation Case — Employer-Employee Relationship Established Despite Lack of Documentary Evidence. Claimant entitled to compensation as driver under Section 30(1) of Workmen Compensation Act, 1923.

The appellant, Sri Siddeswara, filed a Miscellaneous First Appeal under Section 30(1) of the Workmen Compensation Act, 1923, challenging the judgment ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Acquits Appellant in POCSO Case Due to Unproven Age — Benefit of Doubt Given as Prosecution Failed to Establish Minority of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Under Sections 4, 6 of POCSO Act and Sections 363, 376 IPC.

The appellant, Ashik Ramjan Ansari, was convicted by the Special Judge at Greater Bombay in POCSO Special Case No.203 of 2016 for offences under Secti...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Allows Insurance Company's Appeal in Motor Accident Claim — Reduces Compensation Due to Contributory Negligence. Claimant's Deceased Was Driving Without Valid License and Was Negligent, Reducing Insurer's Liability Under Section 163A of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

The appeal arises out of a judgment and award dated 06-08-2009 passed by the Additional MACT, Srirangapatna, in MVC No.848/2003, whereby the petition ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Upholds Hotel Liability for Theft of Guest's Car from Valet Parking Under Bailment and Infra Hospitium Principles. Insurer as Subrogee Can Maintain Consumer Complaint as Co-Complainant.

The appeal arose from a consumer complaint filed by the insurer (United India Insurance Company Ltd.) and the car owner (Respondent No. 2) against the...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Upholds Hotel Liability for Theft of Guest's Car from Valet Parking Under Bailment and Infra Hospitium Principles. Insurer as Subrogee Can File Consumer Complaint Jointly with Assured.

The appeal arose from a judgment of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission dismissing the hotel's appeal against an order of the State Co...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Appeal in Motor Accident Claim Case — Reduces Compensation Due to Contributory Negligence. Deceased voluntarily pushed stationary truck and came under wheels; court apportions 50% contributory negligence and reduces award from Rs.1,00,000 to Rs.50,000.

The case arises from a motor accident claim filed by the widow and minor children of Madhukar Pundlik Mahalley, who died on 3rd December 1989 when he ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Partly Allows Insurance Company Appeal in Motor Accident Claim — Reduces Compensation Due to Lack of Income Proof. Claimant's 100% Permanent Disability Acknowledged but Multiplier and Income Assessment Modified Under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

The National Insurance Company Ltd. appealed against the judgment and order dated 7.6.2004 of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Pune, in Claim Peti...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Enhances Compensation in Motor Accident Claim Under Section 163-A MV Act — Insurance Company's Appeal Dismissed. Multiplier applied as per Second Schedule to MV Act for structured compensation calculation.

The judgment arises from two cross-appeals against the award dated 25.6.2007 in MVC No. 879/2006 by the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn) & MACT, Gangavathi. The cl...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Gujarat Dismisses Insurance Company's Appeal in Motor Accident Claim — No Contributory Negligence Found. Tribunal's Award of Rs.39,80,000/- Upheld as Findings Were Based on Evidence and Not Perverse Under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

The present First Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 was filed by Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd., the appellant, challengin...