Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: accident Court: karnataka Page 3 of about 29,763 results (0.045 seconds)

Manager Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Nagesh and Another

Court : Karnataka

..... they also denied all the other averments made by the claimant in his petition and contended that as per accident has not taken place due to the fault of the driver of the lorry, they are not liable ..... the prop contention of the appellant-insurer is that as the claimant is a gratuitous passenger in the vehicle involved in the accident, his risk is not covered under the policy issued as it is an act policy issued u/s.147 of the act and therefore no liability can be fastened ..... thus, in our view as the claimant/respondent was traveling in the vehicle involved in the accident as a police constable in discharge of his duties, he cannot be construed as a gratuitous passenger as contended ..... in the present case as the claimant/respondent was traveling in the vehicle involved in the accident as an authorized person as the insured is made liable by virtue of what is contemplated u/s.147(2)(a) of the act, the liability of the insured will have to undertaken by ..... the tribunal on considering the oral and documentary evidence on record held that the accident in question has taken place on account of the rash and negligent driving of the lorry bearing no.caw 7100 by its driver and accordingly, the claimant ..... the insurer challenging the liability fastened on them on the ground that the risk of the claimant who is a police constable, being a gratuitous passenger in the goods vehicle involved in the accident, is not covered under the policy of the insurance issued by the appellant u/s.147 of the m.v. .....

Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Reny Mammen and Others

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : [1993]77CompCas266(Kar)

..... only to the lorry owner and not to the appellant; (vii) if, after considering the evidence adduced by the owner of the lorry, the tribunal were to come to the conclusion that the accident occurred on account of the negligence of the driver of the bus belonging to the appellant alone, the tribunal shall pass an order directing the appellant to pay the balance amount of compensation as ..... fee stamps, a process fee of one rupee for each respondent for service of notice and thereafter the claims tribunal shall send to the owner of the motor vehicle involved in the accident and its insurer, a copy of the application together with a notice of the date on which it will hear the application and may call upon the parties to produce on ..... discretion of the claimants to file a claim petition only against one of the drivers and/or owners of the vehicle by furnishing the particulars of only one of the vehicles involved in the accident and secure the entire relief against the owner of that vehicle and the only course open to such owner who is made a respondent in the claim petition, is to file a separate suit ..... appeals was that the tribunal having recorded a finding that the negligence of the driver of the bus belonging to the appellant and the driver of the lorry cns 4319 which resulted in the accident was in equal proportion, there was no justification to foist the entire liability on the corporation leaving the appellant in the lurch by making an observation to the effect that the appellant was .....

The Management of North-west Karnataka Road Transport Corporation, Bel ...

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR2005KAR4984; 2005(5)KarLJ568

..... the normal rule is that it is for the plaintiff to prove negligence but as in some cases considerable hardship is caused to the plaintiff as the true cause of the accident is not known to him but is solely within the knowledge of the defendant who caused it, the plaintiff can prove the accident but cannot prove how it happened to establish negligence on the part of the defendant. ..... may be because of the age of the respondent and want of experience the accident is caused resulting in death of three persons and injury to 20 victims which has given rise to several claims against the corporation. ..... enquiry officer on the ground that the management did not examine any eye-witnesses, conductor who was in the bus as well as the mechanical inspector who had given his report stating that the accident did not happen because of any mechanical defects were not examined. ..... he will not be aware of who are all the persons who were at the spot or who witnessed the accident to bring them as eye-witness to prove the charge in a domestic enquiry. ..... he was served with an articles of charge accusing him of rash and negligent driving which resulted in an accident in which three persons lost life and 20 passengers sustained injuries. ..... as there was an obligation cast upon the enquiry officer to put questions to the delinquent in the event of his not examining himself, he was questioned and his statement was recorded in which he stated the accident arose on account of breaking of front right side main leaf. .....

O.V. Shanthakumari Vs. Kokila

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : 1991ACJ656; ILR1990KAR4324

..... 'law declared as to the 'operative multiplier' principle applicable in making the choice of multiplier for fixing the total toss of dependency of the dependants of a victim of a motor accident in a fatal accident's action when the supreme court decisions in jyotsna dey's case (supra) and rajendra kumari's case (supra) do not contain any 'law declared' as to the 'operative multiplier' ..... normal span of life of 70 years minus the age in years of the deceased at the time of the accident;(c) whether, as a rule, the evidence of the widow of a deceased as to the contribution made by the latter to the family must always be accepted as true;(d) whether any fixed percentage has ..... this court in making the choice of multiplier for capitalising the annual loss of dependency to determine the compensation payable to the dependants of the deceased in a motor accident, being the ratio and principle laid down in the decision on a full exposition of the law on the question falling for its consideration, it becomes the law declared ..... supreme court in the facts of the said case to lay down principles or declare law on general questions -(a) whether, as a rule, the normal span of life of every victim of a motor accident should be taken as 70 years;(b) whether the multiplier to be used for capitalising the annual dependency of the dependants of a deceased to arrive at the 'total loss of dependency' can only be the .....

Sri. Machindranath Kernath Kasar Vs. Sri. D.S. Mylarappa S/O. Siddappa ...

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : 2007ACJ1323; 2007(4)KarLJ12; 2008AIRSCW3546; 2008AIRSC2545; 2008(5)KLJ142; 2008(4)AIRKarR113

..... , learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the evidence on record does not give room to hold that the appellant was solely responsible for the accident, but the fact that the truck was also involved in the accident and that there was collision between the two vehicles, it is, but inevitable to take the view that the driver of the truck had also ..... was handed down by the tribunal against the driver of the ksrtc bus by holding that the driver of the ksrtc bus was responsible for the accident, nothing prevented the appellant from questioning the said finding on negligence when his own claim petition was also pending before the very same tribunal.14. ..... claim petition filed by the appellant herein is concerned, the tribunal recorded a finding that the driver of the ksrtc was responsible for the accident and therefore, dismissed the claim petition filed by the appellant aggrieved by the dismissal of his claim petition, the driver of the ksrtc bus ..... discussed the evidence let in by the parties in great detail and has come to the conclusion that the driver of the ksrtc bus was responsible for the accident, the tribunal also noted that there was no dispute with regard to the ksrtc bus trying to overtake a parked truck. ..... whether a driver who is not made a party before the tribunal, but who is found responsible for causing the accident in question can claim compensation even though the insurer of the vehicle in question accepts the finding of the tribunal and deposits the award amount .....

A. Harsha V. Rai Vs. Dr. K.V. Karna and ors.

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : AIR1973Kant162; AIR1973Mys162; (1972)2MysLJ460

..... it is the case of the owner that balaji rao took his car on the night of the accident not only without his permission but also without his knowledge or consent and that he found the car parked outside the compound of jacobi's house, when he came out of the ..... 2), it turned out that one balaji rao was driving the car at the time of the accident and that a charge sheet was filed against the said balaji rao, who pleaded guilty and was convicted and fined ..... even assuming that balaji rao was driving the car at the time of the accident, we have to see whether this evidence is sufficient to rebut the presumption that he was acting as ..... gurrucharran) it has been held that although ownership of a motor vehicle (which at the time of an accident is being driven by another for his own purposes and without the knowledge of the owner) is, prima facie, evidence that the driver was the agent or servant of the owner and ..... the points for determination in this appeal are: firstly, whether the accident was the result of rash and negligent driving of the driver; secondly, whether the owner of the car and consequently the insurance company are liable to pay damages for the injuries caused by the accident; and thirdly, whether the amount of damages awarded by the tribunal is inadequate ..... right in coming to the conclusion that the owner of the car was liable to pay compensation to the person injured in the accident and that consequently the insurance company is also liable to pay the compensation.18-19. .....

North West Karnataka Road Transport Corporation Vs. Sri D. Kenchappa a ...

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : AIR2009Kant186; ILR2009KAR1580:2009(3)KCCRSN107:2009(4)AIRKarR284:AIR2009Kar186

..... , yet he strongly contended that in view of the agreement entered into between the registered owner and the ksrtc and in view of one of the conditions in the agreement also making it clear that in the event of any accident or injury being caused to any person, it is the registered owner who will have to shoulder the liability and this is clear from condition no ..... .(2) subject to the proviso to sub-section (1), a policy of insurance referred to in sub-section (1), shall cover any liability incurred in respect of any accident, upto the following limits, namely:(a) save as provided in clause (b) the amount of liability incurred;(b) in respect of damage to any property of a third party, a limit of rupees six thousand;provided that any policy of insurance issued with ..... terms and conditions of the agreements, the learned counsel pointed out that the agreements clearly specify that the owners of the buses alone shall be solely liable for any claim arising out of any accident, damage or loss or hurt caused during the operation of the bus and that the k.s.r.t.c. ..... 8042/2006 is concerned, the claimant therein, who is r-1, had preferred the claim petition seeking compensation for the injuries sustained by him in the accident in question and according to him, when he was going on his motorcycle, the bus bearing no. ..... in both the cases, the tribunal has recorded a positive finding that the accidents in question were caused on account of the buses, which were driven under the control of the .....

C.K. Seetharam Vs. Jayalakshmamma and ors.

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : II(1998)ACC7; 1999ACJ1569

..... in case of motor vehicles; motor vehicles are required to be insured for the benefit of the third parties who may get benefit of insurance, in the sense that in case of accident taking place causing damage, death or other injuries, for a person other than those who are parties to the contract of insurance, that is, who are other than the insurer and the insured ..... in the schedule and notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in section ii '(c)' is hereby understood and agreed that the company will indemnify the insured against his legal liability under the statute (except fatal accidents act, 1855) in respect of death of or bodily injury to any person not being an employee of the insured nor carried for hire or reward, provided the person is-(a) owner or the representative ..... where the owner of the goods travels in the goods vehicle along with his goods, after having hired the goods vehicle for the purpose of transportation of goods, if on account of some accident death or injury is caused to such a person, and the owner of the vehicle under the decree becomes liable to pay the compensation, then the liability of the company will also be ..... (2) subject to the proviso to sub-section (1), a policy of insurance referred to in sub-section (1), shall cover any liability incurred in respect of any accident up to the following limits, namely:(a) save as provided in clause (b), the amount of liability incurred;(b) in respect of damage to any property of a third party, a limit of rupees .....

O.V. Shantha Kumari Vs. Kokila

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : II(1991)ACC288

..... contains the law declared as to the 'operative multiplier' principle applicable in making the choice of multiplier for fixing the total loss of dependency of the dependants of a victim of a motor accident in a fatal accident's action when the supreme court decisions in jyotsna day's case (supra) and rajendra kumari's case (supra) do not contain any maw declared' as to the 'operative multiplier' principle, it ..... of the dependants of a deceased to arrive al the 'total loss of dependency' can only be the normal span of life of 70 years minus the age in years of the deceased at the time of the accident;(c) whether, as a rule, the evidence of the widow of a deceased as to the contribution made by the latter to the family must always be accepted as true;(d) whether any fixed percentage has to be deducted ..... bench of this court in making the choice of multiplier for capitalising the annual loss of dependency to determine the compensation payable to the dependants of the deceased in a motor accident, being the ratio and principle laid down in the decision on a full exposition of the law on the question failing for its consideration, it becomes the law declared by the high ..... that the multiplier must suffer some reduction to cater for the possibility that the plaintiff will die earlier than expected, the possibility that he will meet with some accident that will keep him out of work for a lengthy period or even result in his premature retirement, and the like....but it is also said that the .....

The Branch Manager, Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. and Others Vs. Kumar A ...

Court : Karnataka Gulbarga

..... proceeding on his motorcycle along with his wife as a pillion rider on bypass road in a rash and negligent manner and the accident has occurred at the center of the road, as such he had also contributed to the accident, the tribunal without considering this aspect of the matter has committed an error in holding that the accident has occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the truck by its driver. 7. regarding quantum, she submits deceased ashok ..... . regarding point no.2, the insurer of truck who contends in these appeals that deceased ashok jadhav had also contributed to the accident, did not choose to examine either the driver of the truck nor they lead any other evidence in this regard ..... 173(1) of mv act, against the judgment and award dated: 30.04.2013 passed in mvc no:1080/2012 on the file of motor accident claims tribunal no.ill at bijapur, partly allowing the claim petition and awarding compensation of rs.9,13,400/- with interest at 6% p.a. ..... preeti patil melkundi, the learned counsel appearing for the insurer of the truck submits the accident having taken place within the territorial jurisdiction of maharashtra state, and all the parties being residents of neelagoan in tulajapur taluk of maharashtra state, the mact, bijapur had no jurisdiction to entertain the claim petitions and .....