Search Results for "Motor Vehicles Act 1988 Section 166"

1016 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 1016 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Reviews Maintainability of Claim Under Section 163A of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 in Cross Appeals Arising from Fatal Accident. Claim by Legal Heirs of Deceased Driver Who Borrowed Vehicle and Died Without Involvement of Another Vehicle Is Under Scrutiny.

The judgment involves two appeals arising from the same motor accident dated 20.09.2006. An auto rickshaw driven by Ramesh Babu, in which Murali was a...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Appeal Under Workmen's Compensation Act for Permanent Disability — Employer Held Liable Despite Prior Motor Vehicles Act Claim. Receipt of Interim Compensation Under Section 140 MV Act Does Not Bar Claim Under Section 3 of Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923.

The appellant, Maroti Shrawan Manghate, was a driver employed by respondent No.1, Smt. Rita Y. Sapra, to drive truck bearing registration No.MH31 4091...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Bombay at Nagpur Allows Appeal in Motor Accident Claim — Apportionment of No Fault Liability Set Aside. Insurer of the vehicle in which deceased was a cleaner held not liable for interim compensation under Section 140 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

The case arises from a motor accident that occurred on 17/11/2009 on Wani-Yavatmal Road involving two trucks: one bearing registration no. MH34/M/6271...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court Dismisses Insurer's Appeal as Not Maintainable Due to Absence of Tribunal's Permission Under Section 170(b) of Motor Vehicles Act. Appeal Against Quantum of Compensation Fails as Insurer Did Not Obtain Leave to Contest Merits Beyond Statutory Defences.

The High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad, dealt with an appeal filed by M/s Shriram General Insurance Company Limited against an aw...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows PIL Seeking Directions to Motor Accidents Claims Tribunals for Compliance with Procedural Rules. Court Holds That Insistence on Personal Appearance of Claimants at Filing Is Not Mandatory Under Rule 254(2) of Maharashtra Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989.

This Public Interest Litigation was filed by Anil Prabhakar Tadkalkar, a practicing advocate, raising several issues concerning the disposal of claim ...