Court : Jammu and Kashmir
Reported in : 2004ACJ2049
T.S. Doabia, J.1. These appeals have arisen out of two sets of claim petitions; one pertains to an accident cause whereof was a bomb blast and the other deals with an incident where bullets of the terrorists sniffled life out of the passengers. Legal heirs have claimed compensation. In both sets of cases legal heirs have been successful. It is the insurance company which has challenged the decision so given.2. So far as the appeals pertaining to bomb blast are concerned, these are enumerated in Annexure 'A' appended to this judgment. The appeals pertaining to the claimants who are heirs of those who died on account of terrorists bullets find serialised in Annexure 'B'. (Annexures omitted)3. The bomb blast cases deal with incidents which took place on 7.10.1992 and 28.11.1994. The first incident as noticed above took place on 7.10.1992. At about 9.30 a.m. a bus started from Keso Manahasan to Jammu. When bus reached Digiana Ashram, a bomb exploded in it. A number of persons died and some...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Privy Council
Lord Wright: In this case the respondent who was plaintiff in the action was awarded by a jury the sum of $11,15825 as damages for personal injuries sustained by him by reason of the negligence of the appellants who were owners of the motor omnibus which caused the injuries. The judgment for these damages was upheld by a majority of the Court of appeal for Manitoba and that judgment was affirmed by the Supreme Court of Canada. The appellants by this appeal are raising questions on the construction of certain sections of the Act in force at all material times, the Manitoba Motor Vehicles Act. The material section is S. 62 which is in the following terms : " When any loss, damage or injury is caused to any person by a motor vehicle the onus of proof that such loss, damage or injury did not arise through the negligence or improper conduct of the owner or driver of the motor vehicle, and that the same had not been operated at a rate of speed greater than was reasonable and proper, having r...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
The Grace Girdler - 74 U.S. 196 (1868) U.S. Supreme Court The Grace Girdler, 74 U.S. 7 Wall. 196 196 (1868) The Grace Girdler 74 U.S. (7 Wall.) 196 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Syllabus 1. Although the rules of navigation require that a vessel coming up behind another and on the same course with her shall keep out of the way, yet the rule presupposes that the other vessel keeps her course, and it is not to be applied irrespective of the circumstances which may render a departure from it necessary to avoid immediate danger. 2. Where, in case of collision with loss, there is reasonable doubt as to which party is to blame, the loss must be sustained by the one on which it has fallen. 3. This Court will not readily reverse in a case of collision depending on a mere difference of opinion as to the weight and effect of conflicting testimony, where both the district and circuit courts have agreed. It affirmed, accordingly, a decree in such a c...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1962MP23
Shrivastava, J. 1. This first appeal has been filed by the defendants against whom a decree for damages has been passed by the 1st Civil Judge, Chhindwara.2. On 27-11-1954, a truck (bearing No. MFC 447) was being driven by appellant No. 1 Sadaram from Bamhori towards Bhajipani. The truck belonged to appellant No. 2. The Shaw Wallace and Co. Ltd., Parasia. Appellant No. 3 is the Insurance Company with which the truck was insured. Respondents are parents of Ramsingh who came under the truck while it was crossing a culvert. As a result, Ramsingh died.3. The plaintiffs' case was that the truck was driven rashly and negligently by Sadaram at the time of the accident which resulted in the death of Ramsingh. They claimed Rs. 6,000/- as damages.4. The defendant Sadaram pleaded that the truck was bring driven carefully by him. At the time he was about to cross the culvert he saw two boys playing on the right side of the road. One of the boys ran away and the other started going towards the culv...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : I(2003)ACC303; AIR2003AP231; 2003(1)ALD299
P.S. Narayana, J. 1. Heard Sri S.Ravi, learned Counsel representing the appellant/ defendant and Sri S.Narasimha Rao, the learned Counsel representing the respondent/ plaintiff.2. The appeal is preferred by the unsuccessful defendant in O.S. No.441 of 1983 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Kakinada. The respondent/plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 1,79,687-50 ps towards the compensation amount payable under Marine Hull Policy. The respondent as plaintiff had pleaded in the plaint as follows:'The plaintiff is a Co-operative Society registered under A.P. Co-operative Societies Act. The defendant is an Insurance Company. The plaintiff is the owner of a mechanised fishing Sarkar Boat No. 9 K.D.-573. It was insured with the defendant under the Marine Hull Policy 82741242/97 82741242/97 , dated 21.12.1978. The said Insurance Policy covers amongst other things of total loss, constructive total loss, partial loss, etc., to the said boat. As per the terms of the Policy, t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : 1993(41)ECC315
Abdul Hadi, J. 1. O.S.A. Nos. 86 of 1982 and 88 of 1982 arise out of the judgment and decree dated December 20, 1979, in C.S. No. 101 of 1976, on the file of this court. The plaintiffs in the said suit, namely, the Southern India Bearing Distributors Association and Canara Bank are the appellants in O.S.A. No. 86 of 1982 and the third defendant-insurance company is the appellant in O.S.A. No. 88 of 1982. The suit is for a decree for a sum of Rs. 5,89,072 with interest thereon. The first defendant is Navlomour, charterers of vessel S. S. Sumadija, Bucharest, Romania, represented by their agents in India, the South India Corporation Agencies Private Limited, Madras-600 001. The trial court gave a decree against D-3 alone for the abovesaid full sum claimed and decree for Rs. 11,181.56 against D-1. The trial court negatived the suit claim against D-2, namely, the trustees of the port of Bombay. Therefore, O.S.A. No. 86 of 1982, has been filed by the abovesaid plaintiffs praying for decree ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1975Mad225
Maharajan, J.1. This is an appeal by the claimant against the order of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Madras, dismissing her petition under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, claiming a compensation of Rs. 15,000 for the death of her husband, Munuswami in a lorry accident. The accident took place at about 10.30 a.m. on 3-11-69, at the junction between Wall Tax Road and Basin Water Works Street. The deceased was pulling a hand cart laden with medicines in a northerly direction along the Wall Tax Road (which is a north south road), and was turning in an easterly direction towards the Basin Water Works Street, when a lorry bearing MDU 5802 belonging to the third respondent and insured with the second respondent came at great speed in a southerly direction, knocked against the hand cart, ran over Munuswami killing him on the spot, proceeded to a distance of about 40 ft., then knocked against another cart and stopped short afier travelling a further distance of 20 feet. Ex. P.3 ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1958Cal597
P.N. Mookerjee, J.1. A question, much debated in the English Courts and of lesser but by no means infrequent recurrence in this country, has come up for consideration in this appeal. It is important and difficult arid, on it, judicial opinion is widely divergent. The law on the point has been stated or sought to be stated at different times by eminent judges and jurists but the apparent clarity at one stage melted away and faded into indistinctness before later examination and the statement and re-statement of the law again involved the mind in confusion and obscurity. Tests have varied and what appeared to be true, conclusive and exhaustive at one stage was rejected as faulty, unconvincing and insufficient on later occasions. In the latest authoritative pronouncements of the Supreme Court here and of the House of Lords in England we have some certainty which may suffice for our present purpose but still the need that was felt in an earlier decision of the House of Lords of a restateme...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1960P& H392
(1) The facts giving rise to this second appeal from order may be state as under. Shrimati Soman Devi, the plaintiff-respondent, had filed a suit for the recovery of Rs. 5,000/-, as damages on account of the death of her husband Om Prakash. The deceased was travelling in a motor vehicle belonging to defendants Nos. 1 to 3 and it was driven by defendant No. 4 Mast Ram as the driver. It could not negotiate a curve and fell into a khad. The motor vehicle in question No. PNF 847 is 1943 model of Chevrolet station wagon and was registered as a private carrier and belonged to Sohan Lal and his two sons Parmeshwari Das and Om Prakash defendants. On 29th of November, 1953,according to the plaintiff's case, this vehicle was proceeding from Banjar to Aut in Kulu hills. It carried thirteen passengers and an equal number of bags of potatoes weighing approximately twenty-six maunds. The accident took place after the motor vehicle had traversed a distance of about seven miles from Banjar. On a curve...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1973Kant240; AIR1973Mys240; (1973)1MysLJ273
E.S. Venkataramiah, J.1. The incident with which we are concerend in these appeals took place at about 12-15 P. M. on 2-7-1964 along with the road running between Mangalore and Bhatkal. A Bus belonging to the Mysore State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the corporation) bearing No. MYG 4331 was being driven from Byndoor to Bhatkal. After the said bus left Byndoor at a place near Surgihalli, it was going in a down-gradient after negotiating an Up gradient earlier. Earlier when the bus had reached the top of the gradient, the driver of the bus noticed that a bullock-cart had been left unattended on the left side of the road. When he came near the said cart, he took the bus to the right side of the road and when he did so, the right wheels of the bus got on to the mud portion of the road. Within a few minutes thereafter the right wheels sank in the mud on account of the soil at that place giving way. As a consequence thereof, the bus toppled to the right side. There...
Tag this Judgment!