Court : Karnataka Kalaburagi
..... trailer is used for agriculture operation it is nothing short of a good carriage vehicle. schedule-ii(i) as per indian motor tarrif rules and provisions of section-147 of mv act, the risk of the person, who has travelled along with tractor and trailer for agricultural work and operations is covered and in this regard the claim cannot be ..... trailer and in this regard the observations made 22 by the tribunal is contrary to the evidence on record and against the principle of law as enunciated under section - 151 of mv act. therefore, the findings of the tribunal in this regard is liable to be set-aside.22. further, the question to be considered herein is deceased ..... respondent no.4-insurance company. but, the tribunal on its own has observed that the xerox copy cannot be marked. 1212. as per section-63 read with section-65 of the indian evidence act, 1872, even though the documents are produced which is prepared through mechanical process and unless it is objected by the otherside, it can be .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Kalaburagi
..... case, owner of the goods or his authorised representative who carried in the goods vehicle is also covered under the risk as per the 'act policy' as enunciated in section 147 of the act. therefore, in the present case the respondent no.1/claimants were travelling in the said lorry along with loaded goods which is cotton ..... "...the liability could be statutory or contractual. a statutory liability cannot be more than what is required under the statute itself. however, there is nothing in section 95 of the act prohibiting the parties from contracting to create unlimited or higher liability to cover wider risk. in such an event, the insurer is bound by the terms of ..... of the goods or his authorised representative carried in the vehicle" by substituting the word as "injury to any person". therefore, by making amendment to this section 147 of the act, 1988 the risk in respect of the persons who are workmen/ coolie/ hamali/employee who were carrying in the goods carriage vehicle and even they are .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Kalaburagi
..... case, owner of the goods or his authorised representative who carried in the goods vehicle is also covered under the risk as per the 'act policy' as enunciated in section 147 of the act. therefore, in the present case the respondent no.1/claimants were travelling in the said lorry along with loaded goods which is cotton ..... "...the liability could be statutory or contractual. a statutory liability cannot be more than what is required under the statute itself. however, there is nothing in section 95 of the act prohibiting the parties from contracting to create unlimited or higher liability to cover wider risk. in such an event, the insurer is bound by the terms of ..... of the goods or his authorised representative carried in the vehicle" by substituting the word as "injury to any person". therefore, by making amendment to this section 147 of the act, 1988 the risk in respect of the persons who are workmen/ coolie/ hamali/employee who were carrying in the goods carriage vehicle and even they are .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Kalaburagi
..... case, owner of the goods or his authorised representative who carried in the goods vehicle is also covered under the risk as per the 'act policy' as enunciated in section 147 of the act. therefore, in the present case the respondent no.1/claimants were travelling in the said lorry along with loaded goods which is cotton ..... "...the liability could be statutory or contractual. a statutory liability cannot be more than what is required under the statute itself. however, there is nothing in section 95 of the act prohibiting the parties from contracting to create unlimited or higher liability to cover wider risk. in such an event, the insurer is bound by the terms of ..... of the goods or his authorised representative carried in the vehicle" by substituting the word as "injury to any person". therefore, by making amendment to this section 147 of the act, 1988 the risk in respect of the persons who are workmen/ coolie/ hamali/employee who were carrying in the goods carriage vehicle and even they are .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Kalaburagi
..... case, owner of the goods or his authorised representative who carried in the goods vehicle is also covered under the risk as per the 'act policy' as enunciated in section 147 of the act. therefore, in the present case the respondent no.1/claimants were travelling in the said lorry along with loaded goods which is cotton ..... "...the liability could be statutory or contractual. a statutory liability cannot be more than what is required under the statute itself. however, there is nothing in section 95 of the act prohibiting the parties from contracting to create unlimited or higher liability to cover wider risk. in such an event, the insurer is bound by the terms of ..... of the goods or his authorised representative carried in the vehicle" by substituting the word as "injury to any person". therefore, by making amendment to this section 147 of the act, 1988 the risk in respect of the persons who are workmen/ coolie/ hamali/employee who were carrying in the goods carriage vehicle and even they are .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Kalaburagi
..... case, owner of the goods or his authorised representative who carried in the goods vehicle is also covered under the risk as per the 'act policy' as enunciated in section 147 of the act. therefore, in the present case the respondent no.1/claimants were travelling in the said lorry along with loaded goods which is cotton ..... "...the liability could be statutory or contractual. a statutory liability cannot be more than what is required under the statute itself. however, there is nothing in section 95 of the act prohibiting the parties from contracting to create unlimited or higher liability to cover wider risk. in such an event, the insurer is bound by the terms of ..... of the goods or his authorised representative carried in the vehicle" by substituting the word as "injury to any person". therefore, by making amendment to this section 147 of the act, 1988 the risk in respect of the persons who are workmen/ coolie/ hamali/employee who were carrying in the goods carriage vehicle and even they are .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Kalaburagi
..... cheque. now accused is estopped from contending contrary to what has been stated by him once cheque is issued knowing fully its consequence. the offence under section 138 of n.i act is committed if the cheque is returned with endorsement as *"funds "insufficient" or "exceed arrangements". the accused cannot contend that, the other legal heirs ..... . when there is no debt or liability exists, then the said cheque amount will not become legally recoverable debt or other liability, the offence under section 138 of negotiable instrument act will not sustain. in this regard there is decision of this high court reported in 2018(2) akr440in the case of branch manager, pca & rd ..... (2) crimes 658 held that, in *the case of cheque issued for time barred debt *was dishonoured,* the accused cannot be convicted under section 138 of negotiable instrument act on the ground that the debt was not legally recoverable.33. the high court of gujarath in case of jayanthilal maganlal brahmbhatt vs state of gujarat .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Kalaburagi
..... . the liability could be statutory or contractual. a statutory liability cannot be more than what is required under the statute itself. however, there is nothing in section 95 of the act prohibiting the parties from contracting to create unlimited or higher liability to cover wider risk. in such an event, the insurer is bound by the terms of ..... in that case the discussion arose in connection with carrying passengers in a goods vehicle. this court after referring to the terms of section 147 of the 1988 act, as contrasted with section 95 of the 1939 act, held that the judgment in satpal singh's case (supra) had been incorrectly decided and that the insurer will not be liable to ..... manager, dr.jawali complex, super market, gulbarga. respondents (by sri babu h.metagudda, advocate for r1 sri sudarshan m.advocate for r2) this mfa is filed under section 173(1) of mv act, against the judgment and award dated 22.04.2009 passed in mvc no.544/2008 on the file of the ii addl. civil judge (sr.dn.) & mact .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Kalaburagi
..... and, hence, the insurer is legally obliged to indemnify the insured.11. a distinction has to be made between route permit and permit in the context of section 149 of the act. section 149(2) provides the grounds that can be taken as defence by the insurer. it enables the insurer to defend on the ground that there has been ..... ... respondents (by smt. sangeeta bhadrashetty, advocate for 3; notice to r1 & r2 is dispensed with v/o dated 28.01.2015) this mfa is filed under section 173(1) of mv.act, praying to enhance the compensation amount payable to the appellant by suitably modifying the judgment and award dated 17.09.2013 passed by the member motor accident claims tribunal ..... .biradar, adv. for r1 & r4, r2 & r3 are minors represented by r1; by sri.arunkumar amargundappa, adv. for r5 &6) this mfa is filed under section 173(1) of mv.act, praying to call for records in mvc no.225/2013 on the file of the ii-addl. district judge and member, motor accident claims tribunal, at raichur. allow this .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Kalaburagi
..... and, hence, the insurer is legally obliged to indemnify the insured.11. a distinction has to be made between route permit and permit in the context of section 149 of the act. section 149(2) provides the grounds that can be taken as defence by the insurer. it enables the insurer to defend on the ground that there has been ..... ... respondents (by smt. sangeeta bhadrashetty, advocate for 3; notice to r1 & r2 is dispensed with v/o dated 28.01.2015) this mfa is filed under section 173(1) of mv.act, praying to enhance the compensation amount payable to the appellant by suitably modifying the judgment and award dated 17.09.2013 passed by the member motor accident claims tribunal ..... .biradar, adv. for r1 & r4, r2 & r3 are minors represented by r1; by sri.arunkumar amargundappa, adv. for r5 &6) this mfa is filed under section 173(1) of mv.act, praying to call for records in mvc no.225/2013 on the file of the ii-addl. district judge and member, motor accident claims tribunal, at raichur. allow this .....
Tag this Judgment!