Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1965AP457
..... state of andhra pradesh, : air1961ap283 , that in attaching vicarious liability in torts to the state, it is necessary to ascertain whether the acts complained of are the acts in exercise of government powers which cannot be lawfully exercised save by the sovereign authority or by the person to whom the sovereign authority or by the persons to whom the sovereign authority might delegate such powers, or are they such acts as are done by the government in pursuance of ventures which a private individual might undertake ..... according to it the collector or other officer empowered by him has to furnish to the person employed to distrain the property a demand in writing specifying the arrears for which the distress is issued, and the date on which the distress is issued, and the date on which arrears ..... vidhyawati, : air1962sc933 .in that case, the defendant, a motor driver, who was employed temporarily to drive the jeep car of the collector, was driving the car back after repairs were effected to it, and knocked down one jagadishlal, causing serious fractures and other injuries, as a result of which ..... it is unfortunate that the government being the employer he has to look in vain for some appropriate provision which may afford a just and ..... a copy of this has to be furnished to the person employed to distrain, requiring him to deliver a copy of such writing to the defaulter endorsing thereon a list of the property to be distrained, and the name of the place where it may be lodged .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1990ACJ971; AIR1991AP323
..... of the use of the vehicle in a public place: provided that a policy shall not be required-(i) to cover liability in respect of the death arising out of and in the course of his employment, of the employee of a person incurred by the policy or in respect of bodily injury sustained by such an employee arising out of and in the course of his employment other than a liability arising under the workmen's compensation act, 1923 (8 of 1923) in respect of the death of, bodily injury to, and such employee- (a) engaged in driving the ..... vehicle, or (b) if it is a public service vehicle, engaged as a conductor of the vehicle or in examining tickets in the vehicle, or (c) if it is a goods vehicle, being carried in the vehicle, or (ii) except where the vehicle is a vehicle in which passengers are carried for hire or reward or by reason of or in pursuance of a contract of employment, to cover liability in respect of the death ..... the proviso shows that the policy shall not be required to cover the liability in respect of the death arising out of and in the course of his employment, of the employee of a person incurred by the policy or in respect of bodily injury sustained by such an employee other than the liability arising under the workmen's compensation act. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1964AP71
..... but the learned counsel for the plaintiff has argued that the 1st defendant is not a 'common carrier' within the meaning of the carriers act and that the liability of the 1st defendant arose not because of the statutory liability created by the carriers act but on the basis of a contract, express or implied, by reason of the entrustment made by the plaintiff to the 2nd defendant, who, in law, is the agent of his principal, the 1st defendant. ..... anything herein before contained, every common carrier shall be liable to the owner for loss of or damage to any property delivered to such carrier to be carried where such loss or damage shall have arisen from the criminal act of the carrier or any of his agents or servants and shall also be liable to the owner for loss or damage to any such property other than property to which the provisions of section 3 apply and in respect of which the ..... in reaching that conclusion, the learned judges held that a person, other than the owner, may employ the carrier on his own account and then may sue the carrier on such contract, and that the special contract, if provided, supersedes the necessity of showing the ownership of the goods, but that the ..... u tun on, air 1938 rang 437 and has contended that under the provisions of order 8, rule 2 civil procedure code, the 1st defendant not having specifically raised the question, he must be deemed to have waived the objection. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1986(9)ECC317; 1985LC1001(AP); 1987(27)ELT273(AP)
..... with them in that order : (a) the first question is whether, during the period 1-3-1976 to 17-6-1977, the petitioner was employing more than 49 workers, so as to attract the liability to duty under tariff item 68 ..... such special provision in the central excise act including apprentices within the meaning and definition of workers, we see no reason to include apprentices within the meaning and definition of workers; if so, it must be held that the petitioner was employing only 47 workers during the aforesaid ..... the collector of central excise issued a notice to the petitioner, under section 35a of the central excise act, calling upon it to show cause why the order of the deputy collector dated 24-9-1980 should ..... affairs of the company in failing to register the company as a dealer acted in the honest and genuine belief that the company was not a ..... 68 of the first schedule to the central excises and salt act, 1944 (1 of 1944) from the whole of the ..... . 68 of the first schedule to the central excises & salt act, 1944 (1 of 1944) manufactured in a factory as a job work, from so much of the duty of excise leviable thereon as is in excess of the duty calculated on the basis of the ..... is prescribed, the authority competent to impose the penalty will be justified in refusing to impose penalty, when there is a technical or venial breach of the provisions of the act or where the breach flows from a bona fide belief that the offender is not liable to act in the manner prescribed by the statute .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1990AP370
..... employees of a person insured by the policy or in respect of bodily injury sustained by such an employee arising out of and in the course of his employment, (other than a liability arising under the workmen's compensation act, 1923) (8 of 1923), in respect of the death of, or bodily injury to, any such employee- (a) engaged in driving the vehicle; or (b) if it is a public service vehicle, engaged as a conductor of the vehicle, or in examining tickets on the vehicle; or (c) if it is a goods vehicle, being carried in the ..... vehicle, or (ii) except where the vehicle is a vehicle inwhich passengers are carried for hire or reward or by reason of or in pursuance of a contract of employment, to cover liability in respect of the death of or bodily injury to persons being carried in or upon ..... the only question for consideration in all these appeals is where passengers are carried for hire or reward in a lorry and the contract of insurance does not provide for such carriage, is the liability covered by the act policy in case of death or bodily injury to the passengers and the insurer is liable to pay compensation?2. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1991AP103
..... considering in this perspective i am of the considered view that i cannot accede to the law laid down in the above judgment though this express plea of limiting the liability has not been specifically pleaded in the counter in view of the fact that it is a pure question of law it can be raised in the appellate court and the appellate court also can go into and decide the matter. ..... (ii) in respect of passengers, -- a limit of fifteen thousand rupees for each individual passenger.thereby the limit of the liability of the insurer in respect of the passnegers or passengers carried for hire or reward is limited to rs.15,000/- to each individual passenger: thereby the contract in cl. ..... sri reddappa reddy has also contended that under the policy, ex.b1 the insurance company has not limited its liability in respect of death of or bodily injury to any person caused by or arisen out of the use of the motor vehicle. ..... in this case though there is no such limit prescribed in the contract of insurance but when the limit is expresslyengrafted in s.95(2)(b)(ii) itself then, that will be the liability to which the insurance company had undertaken to indemnify under the contract of insurance. ..... it is well settled that the contract of insurance is a compulsory insurance under s.92 of the act and the liability has been prescribed under s.95. ..... (b) where the vehicle is a vehicle, in which passengers are carried for hire or reward or by reason of or in pursuance of a contract of employment--(i)..... .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2000ACJ918; 1999(1)ALD245; 1999(1)ALT113
..... (c) except so far as is necessary to meet the requirements of section 92a and 95 of the motor vehicles act, 1939, in relation to the liability under the workmen's compensation act, 1923, the company shall not be liable in respect of death of or bodily injury to any person (other than a passenger carried by reason of or in pursuance of a contract of employment) being carried in or upon or entering or mounting or alighting from the motor vehicle at the time of the occurrence of the event out of which any claim arises.'14. ..... the insurance policy, ex.b1, under the head 'limits of liability', recited that limits of the amount of the insurance company's liability under section ii-1(i) in respect of any accident was such amount as was necessary to meet the requirements of the motor vehicles act, 1939 and the limit of the amount of the company's liability under section ii-1(ii) in respect of any claim or series of claims arising out of one event was rs.50,000/-. ..... motor vehicle;(ii) damage to property caused by the use (including the loading and/or unloading) of the motor vehicle.provided always that:(b) except so far as necessary to meet the requirements of section 92a and 95 ofthe motor vehicles act, 1939, the company shall not be liable in respect of death of or bodily injury to any person in the employment of the insured arising out of and in the course of such .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1997AP347
..... made by the insurer the 1st respondent herein) to the insured (the 2nd respondent herein) under the contract of insurance, by no stretch of imagination can be treated as payment made in discharge of the liability of the carrier (the appellant herein) for its negligence and the carrier cannot get exonerated on the flimsy plea that the insured suffered no loss because the insurer compensated the toss -- it is hero that ..... was the normal transit hazard due to circumstances beyond its control and that as the goods were booked at 'owners risk' they would not admit claim or liability in the matter and suggested that the matter should be taken up with 'the insurance company with which you should have taken a policy for covering' the goods in question. ..... we are, therefore, of the view that the appellant, as common carrier, cannot contract out or relieve itself of its absolute liability under section 8 of the carriers act, 1865 by stipulating that the goods were being carried at 'the owner's risk', and that the burden is clearly upon it to ..... by the english law to receive all goods brought to him for carriage, provide he had conveniences to carry them, and the employer was ready to pay any reasonable reward for the conveyance......he was also bound to carry the goods within a reasonable time, and to insure their safety during the carriage, and until delivery to the consignee, the act of god and the queen's enemies only excepted. ..... reason of their exercising a public employment for reward. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : [1990]182ITR358(AP)
..... a correct provision under the employees' state insurance act concerning the statutory liability relating to the assessment year under consideration, it is not possible to resist the assessee's claim for deduction in view of the system of accounting employed by them. ..... if, eventually, the assessee succeeds finally and no liability under the employees' state insurance act is affirmed, then, it will be open to the department to invoke the provision of section 40(1) of the income-tax act and bring to assessment the amount or amounts allowed as deduction remitted ..... not accepted by the employees' state insurance department and was carried in appeal to the high court, the fact would remain that the declaration given by the employees' insurance court regarding non-liability would prevail until a contrary view is taken by the superior appellate authority. ..... as the question regarding liability was not finally decided, the assessee claimed that, in connection with the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1980-81, the statutory liability on account of the employees state insurance on the basis of the demand earlier raised by the department, ..... the employees' state insurance department filed an appeal in the high court against the judgment and order dated january 28, 1978, of the employees' insurance court so that the dispute regarding the assessee's liability continued to exist. 3. ..... reference arising under the income-tax act, 1961 (for short 'the act'), relates to the assessment year 1980 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : [1984]56CompCas79(AP)
..... behind all these decisions is that under proviso to section 95(1)(b) of the act, the insurance company is liable to meet the liability in respect of death or bodily injury to a passenger only if he has been carried for hire or reward or by reasons of or in pursuance of a contract of employment. ..... this against is not a case dealing with the liability of an insurance company, but that of the ..... 1980 is concerned, the claimant is the driver of the lorry, and there can hardly be any dispute about the liability of the insurance company to pay compensation to him. ..... [1978] acj 267 (p & h), but i find that this decision does not deal with the liability of the insurance company nor, with ss. ..... of any and every conditions of a policy does not exonerate the insurer from liability the act. ..... again is not a case dealing with the liability of an insurance company with refers to ss., ..... not brought to my notice that the permit for a goods vehicle issued under the act entitles such a goods vehicle to carry passengers for hire or rawer. ..... the liability of the owner of the vehicle, however, remains undisturbed and it shall be open to the claimants to proceed against the owner of the vehicle for the realisation of the compensation awarded ..... deals only with the liability of an owner. ..... was raised that he insurance company was not liable, inasmusch as the injured person (owner of the goods transported in the vehicle) was not a person carried for hire or reward, or by reason of or in pursuance of a contract of employment. .....
Tag this Judgment!