Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 1995ACJ36; AIR1995Bom55; 1995(1)BomCR67; (1994)96BOMLR83; [1995(70)FLR360]; (1995)ILLJ833Bom; 1994(2)MhLj1656
..... if the claim for compensation made under motor vehicles act, 1939 could not be entertained by the claims tribunal for want of valid cause of action or for want of proof in respect of negligence of the driver causing the accident as alleged, section 110aa of motor vehicles act, 1939 can never be applied so as to bar the claim for compensation under workmen's compensation act, 1923. ..... the court held that no claim for compensation under motor vehicles act, 1939 could be entertained by the claims tribunal unless the accident had occurred due to actionable negligence of the owner or the driver of the vehicle causing injury or death of third party. ..... in this case, the dependents of the deceased had already made a claim for compensation before the motor accident claims tribunal and the compensation was already awarded by the tribunal to the claimants concerned. ..... even if the deceased was himself negligently driving the tractor leading to the accident in question, the claim for compensation under workmen's compensation act, 1923 may be still maintainable against the employer concerned or against the insurance company if the deceased died as a result of an accident which took place during the course of employment of the deceased. ..... the dependents of the deceased may not be aware about the cause for the death of the deceased and may not be able to prove that the deceased had died as a result of an accident which occurred due to actionable negligence of the owner or the driver concerned. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1941)43BOMLR611
..... gave notice to the factory inspector on july 18, that is thirteen days after the accident, and the factory inspector then wrote to the employers, and this was the first ..... could not be relied upon; but, in any case, the notice to the mistry, even if passed on to the manager, was too late, because it was given six or seven days after the accident had to the knowledge of the workman become one in respect of which he was required to give notice. ..... a particle of metal flying into the workman's eye was not an accident of; which he was required to give notice, but any injury to the eye is, of course, likely to develop into something serious; and it seems to me that on the evidence of the workman himself, and of the doctor to whom he went, it is plain that within three days at the outside the accident had developed into a serious matter, and the workman was bound ..... the section provides:no claim for compensation shall be entertained by a commissioner unless notice of the accident has been given in the manner hereinafter provided as soon as practicable after the happening thereof.then there are certain provisos, the third of which is in these terms:provided, further, ..... the learned commissioner has found as a fact that the accident arose out of and in the course of the employment, and he has also found that there was sufficient cause for not giving earlier notice of the accident, and this appeal is brought on the ground that the commissioner was wrong in holding that there was sufficient .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : [1987]62CompCas393(Bom); 1987MhLJ602
..... section 95(2)(b) of the motor vehicles act had held that it cannot be disputed that in view of the provisions of section 95(2) (b)(ii)(4), an insurance policy covers only a liability incurred in respect of any accident up to the prescribed limits and that it is apparent that there ar two kinds of limits, one as regards the main and overall liability and the other being the one prescribed in sub-clause (4). ..... any difference in principle to depart from the decision of the supreme court in modi's case [1981] acj 507 : [1982] 52 comp cas 454 (sc) wherein the question of 'any one accident' was considered and treated such phrase occurring in section 95(2)(a) of the act with regard to a third party liability as giving rise to independent liability qua each person involved ..... now, as it is seen, this court has in the circumstances held in the cases of kashi vishnu and deepathumma's case , that the expression 'any one accident' has also to be looked at from the angle of the victim of the accident in clause (b), and considering the express provision of sub-clause (4), further held that in any event the liability of the insurance company will not exceed the outer ..... provisions of section 95(2)(a), as they stood before the amendment and it was in the context of the said provisions of law that the court held that the expression 'any one accident' occurring in the section held to be looked at from the point of view of the various claims, each of whom is entitled to make a separate claim for the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1969Bom13; (1968)70BOMLR212; ILR1968Bom998; 1968MhLJ468
..... = air 1915 mad 993 the plaintiff had sued the secretary of state for india in council for damages in respect of injuries sustained by him in a carriage accident which was alleged to have been due to the negligent stacking of gravel on a military road maintained by the public works department. ..... state was held liable for the tort of the driver because at the time of the accident the car was not being used in connection with the exercise of any of the ..... that when the jeep car was being driven back from the repair shop to the collector's place when the accident took place, it was doing anything in connection with the exercise of sovereign powers of the state? ..... disagreed with the trial court and held that the state of rajasthan was liable because at the time of the accident the car was not being used in the exercise of any sovereign power of the state. ..... adequate evidence was produced at the trial to show that at the time of the accident the deceased abdul majeed was riding on his bicycle on the left side of the ..... 1942 ac 601 ae laying down the principle on which damages in cases of fatal accidents should be ascertained:'it is a hard matter of pounds, shilling and pence, subject to the ..... safe to say that that case cannot be regarded as an authority for the general proposition that in no case can an action for damages be brought against the government merely because the vehicle involved in the accident is an army truck driven by a military employee in the performance of some duty or other.'13. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2005(4)ALLMR552; 2005(4)BomCR761
..... for the petitioner-corporation submitted that it was not permissible for the labour court to re-appreciate the evidence on record and the panchanama drawn as well as the sketch of the place of accident including the prevailing circumstances duly proved that the accident had taken place solely because of the acts of negligence on the part of the driver while descending in the ghat section and more so, the vehicle was in a high speed contrary to the ..... fact that the respondent driver was guilty of rash and negligent driving, in the accident one lady passenger met with an instantaneous death, the damage caused to the bus in the said accident was estimated to be approximately rs.1,00,000/-and during the pendency of the disciplinary proceedings on account of the said accident occurred on 15.6.1988, the respondent driver committed another serious accident on 20.9.1988, the relief of reinstatement cannot be granted and the order of dismissal in fact deserves ..... after passing khed, he was driving the bus in the ghat sections near village asurde, the bus met with an accident and in the said accident the bus plunged into the valley and went down about 60 ft. ..... the depot manager - chiplun depot, visited the scene of the accident and on the basis of his report, the respondent was charge-sheeted on 10.9.1988 alleging the acts of misconduct under clause 10, 11, 22, 27 and 42 of schedule a of the discipline and appeal procedure rules of the corporation. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 1992ACJ1013; AIR1992Bom396
..... a rigid application of the rule obviously resulted in harsh and inequitable treatment of those whose contribution to the wrong was less or his negligence was not the major cause of accident, but whose loss in suffering was great.negligence involves three ingredients, a legal duty to take care, breach of that duty and consequential damage to another.duty to take care is defined as a restriction of the defendant's freedom of conduct, ..... if the conduct in question falls short of that standard or if the circumstances of the act are such that a reasonable man would have seen the probability of the accident, then the defendant who failed to do likewise or who envisaged it and rejected it as too remote a chance, has to be regarded as having been negligent. ..... where the negligence of the plaintiff or that of the defendant is the sole cause of the accident, the matter is free from doubt, but the difficulty may arise where the accident is caused partly by the negligence by the plaintiff and partly by the defendant. ..... the learned counsel for the appellant/petitioner further submitted that the learned member of the tribunal has committed an error in observing in para 14 of the judgment that the accident in this case took place due to the negligence on the part of the petitioner himself. ..... this appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 30th january, 1981, passed by the member of the motor accident claims tribunal, buldana, dismissing the petition of the appellant ishwardas ingle.2. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1933Bom465; (1933)35BOMLR1007; 147Ind.Cas.354
..... 411 referred to before, in which the brick fell from a railway bridge built only about three years before the date of the accident, the plea of res ipsa loquitur put forward by the plaintiff was not met by any evidence on the side of the defendants at all, and one of the judges who disagreed with the majority went so far as to ..... 539 he states the rule as follows:-where damage is done by the falling of objects into a highway from a building, the modern rule is that the accident, in the absence of explanation, is of itself evidence of negligence, in other words, the burden of proof is on the occupier of the building. ..... the first plaintiff was, therefore, not, strictly speaking, the owner at the date of the accident, and though she paid off the remaining instalments by october 18, 1926, the car had been sold off and did not belong to her at the date of the suit. ..... therefore, there was some evidence to go to the jury, however slight it may have been, of this accident having arisen from the negligence of the defendants; and it was incumbent on the defendants to give evidence rebutting the inference arising from the undisputed facts;...this case was confirmed in appeal (1871) l.r. 6 q.b. ..... the defendant denies negligence, and says that the fall was due to an inevitable accident, and that he is not liable to pay any damages to the plaintiffs or either of them.2. ..... she paid in all eight instalments before the date of the accident, and got back the eight hundis which have been put in. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1955Bom105; (1954)56BOMLR509; ILR1954Bom1051
..... the law does not place an additional burden upon the applicant to prove that the peril which the employee faced and the accident which arose because of that peril was not personal to him but was shared by all the employees or the members of the public.mr. ..... it is because of this that the authorities have made it clear that the causal connection between the accident and the employment which the applicant has to establish is not a remote or ultimate connection, but a connection which is only proximate.once that proximate connection is established the applicant has discharged the burden, and in this ..... been faced by any other employee or any other member of the public, then if the accident arises out of such peril, a causal connection is established between the employment and the accident.in this particular case what is established is that the employee while in the course of his employment found himself in a spot where he was assaulted and stabbed to death. ..... being built on the property of an adjoining proprietor, with the result that the roof of the shed collapsed and the woman was buried under the wreckage, and the house of lords held that the accident arose out of her employment, and the principle is well stated by lord shaw p. ..... it is not disputed by the railway company that the deceased died as a result of an accident, nor is it disputed that the accident arose in the course of his employment.but what is disputed is that the accident did arise out of the employment of the deceased. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2(1984)ACC191; AIR1984Bom231
..... 19 to say that somebody else may have taken away the car from the garage and met with an accident, and therefore pleaded by the car owner nor any evidence has been adduced in that regard. ..... is established on record that byj-8037 ambassador car was in fact involved in the accident and further if it is proved that the said car was driven in a rash and negligent manner at the material time which resulted in the fatal accident sustained by late dhondo datar, then certainly the car owner jagdish prasad would be ..... normally 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. ..... disclose any name of the driver, but contended that the car had not met with any accident on the relevant date, nor was it due to the rash and negligent driving of ..... in the instant case, from the description given by the eye-witnesses in respect of the accident and which is unchallenged in their cross-examination, goes to show that the car in question had proceeded in speed to the right extremity of the road dashing the unaware ..... he further states:'it is denied that this defendant's vehicle was in any way involved in the accident referred herein or that dhondo s/o gangadhar datar died due to the dash of the vehicle no. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1989Bom325; 1988(3)BomCR274; (1989)91BOMLR552; 1988MhLJ863
..... 96(1) of the act will have no relevance as regards the questions as to the date on which the liability of the insurance company in respect of the accident arises, reliance was placed by learned counsel on another decision of the supreme court in the case of commr. ..... is therefore, not possible to accept the contention of earned counsel that the unauthorized act on the part of respondent 6 was not in the course of his employment or that the accident had not occurred while the truck was being driven by respondent 5 in the course of employment. ..... the high court and restored that of the tribunal having regard to the fact that the tribunal having regards to the fact that the accident having happened on april 5, 1970, the extent of the insurer's liability must be determined by the application of the law introduced by the amendment which had come into force before the accident.8in the present case, the accident took place, admittedly, prior to the commencement of the amending act no. ..... attention to the aforesaid decision of the supreme court, it is necessary to mentions that in the insurance cover of the truck in question, it is started that the limit of the amount of the company's liability under s.ii-1 (i) in respect of any one accident, such amount as is necessary to meet the requirements of the motor vehicles act , 1939. ..... must necessarily have regard to the state of the law obtaining at the time of the accident for determining the extent of the insurer's liability under a statutory policy. .....
Tag this Judgment!