Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: inevitable accident Page 9 of about 26,718 results (0.022 seconds)

The L. P. Dayton

Court : US Supreme Court

..... the argument is that such a disaster could only occur from fault of navigation or from that vis major, which is styled inevitable accident; that by the supposition, the appellant is free from fault; that consequently it must be that either there was fault on the other side or inevitable accident, in either of which cases it is incumbent upon the respondent affirmatively to establish its excuse. ..... own navigation, was without fault on its part, and it is manifest from the circumstances appearing on the pleadings that the collision was caused either by the fault of one or the other of the tugs or was result of inevitable accident, the burden of proof rests upon each to establish such facts as excuse it. ..... the relative position of the steam tug of the other tow to the appellant and its tug, before and up to the instant before the accident, and its action during that time, were not such as to constitute a violation of rev.stat. .....

The Virginia Ehrman and the Agnese

Court : US Supreme Court

..... vessels in motion are required to keep out of the way of a vessel at anchor, if the latter is without fault, unless it appears that the collision was the result of inevitable accident; the rule being that the vessel in motion must exonerate herself from blame, by showing that it was not in her power to prevent the collision by adopting any practicable precautions. ..... innocent parties in a case of collision are entitled to full compensation for the injuries received by their vessel, unless it occurred by inevitable accident, provided the amount does not exceed the amount or value of the interest of the other party in the colliding ship and her freight then pending. ..... ship owners, if their ship is without fault, are entitled in a cause of collision, except where it occurs from inevitable accident, to full compensation for the damage their ship receives, provided it does not exceed the value of the offending vessel and her freight then pending, and the same rule applies where the injury is ..... that the steam dredge is responsible for the accident, by reason of the place and manner of her anchorage; 2. .....

Sanjay Kumar and anr. Vs. Munnalal and anr.

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Reported in : 1993ACJ869

..... was a case of 'inevitable accident' would depend also on that ..... that the plea of inevitable accident, according to me, is not sustainable at this stage though there was that special plea raised in the written statement filed ..... for this short but pointed reason, albeit based on jurisprudence of motor accident claims, i hold that there is no fatal deficiency in the pleading and the claim petition was ..... what was the condition of the vehicle when the accident took place or when the vehicle was taken out of the garage are facts which had to ..... at para 4 of the claim petition what i read is that the accident took place because the tie-rod of the front wheel missed a ball owing to which the ..... who deposed in this case for the claimants is father of the deceased onkar lal and in his evidence he merely stated that he was informed by all and sundry that the accident occurred due to the mechanical defect above-referred.12. mr. ..... is required to take out 'fitness certificate' from the statutory authority in due discharge of that duty and the burden is on the owner to establish that when the accident took place, the vehicle was mechanically fit. ..... if due to any latent defect such as a manufacturing defect, in any vital mechanism of the vehicle, the accident occurred, the position would be different. ..... , as observed above, the question to be examined and decided would primarily be, if due care was taken to ensure mechanical fitness of the vehicle before it was put on road and when the accident took place. .....

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Susamma Varghese

Court : Kerala

Reported in : 1990ACJ521

..... the probabilities are that it was an inevitable accident resulting from water on the road. ..... there is nothing for the insurer to indemnify if the claimant's husband was not driving the vehicle in a rash or negligent manner and if the accident was an inevitable or an unavoidable one, there cannot be a claim under the law of torts in india and a claim cannot be put forward under section 110-a of the motor vehicles act.7 ..... in order that a claimant be entitled to compensation under the provisions of the act, it must be established that the accident was caused on account of rash and negligent driving of the driver of the vehicle involved in the case. ..... if the claimant's husband was guilty of rash and negligent driving and such driving caused the accident, his widow who is his representative cannot put forward a claim against the insurer. ..... the principle behind the contract of indemnity is that where the owner of a motor vehicle is compelled to pay compensation to persons who suffered injury or damage on account of an accident involving the vehicle, the insurer will indemnify the owner. ..... at any rate no party has a case that the accident was the result of rash and negligent driving by the owner- ..... the claim application merely describes it as an accident without averring that the accident took place on account of rashness or negligence in ..... she filed a claim petition before the motor accidents claims tribunal, trivandrum, under section 110-a of the motor vehicles act claiming compensation of rs .....

Vohra Sadikbhai Rajakbhai and Ors. Vs. State of Gujarat and Ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... in nutshell, what needs to be examined is as to whether the damage to the property of the appellant herein was the result of an inevitable accident or unavoidable accident which could not possibly be prevented by the exercise of ordinary care, caution and skill, i.e. ..... on these facts, two aspects need consideration, which are: (a) whether the act of releasing the water from the dam would amount to negligence on the part of the respondents or it was inevitable due to heavy rains and is to be treated as an 'act of god'?. ..... the aforesaid principle has withstood the test of time as it is not only followed by the courts in england in subsequent judgments repeatedly, even this court has adopted in certain cases and extended to cover accidents arising out of use of motor vehicles on road. ..... it may be due to negligence, nuisance, trespass, inevitable mistake etc. ..... it was an accident physically unavoidable. .....

Railroad Company Vs. Lockwood

Court : US Supreme Court

..... was created and established for that purpose alone, is changed to a private carrier for hire by a mere contract with a customer whereby the latter assumes the risk of inevitable accidents in the carriage of his goods. ..... made by common carriers with their customers limiting their liability are good and valid so far as they are just and reasonable -- to the extent, for example, of excusing them for all losses happening by accident, without any negligence or fraud on their part; when they ask to go still further and to be excused for negligence -- an excuse so repugnant to the law of their foundation and to the ..... any superior force and any inevitable accident. ..... consequence of negligence on the part of the defendants or their servants, but they insisted that they were exempted by the terms of the contract from responsibility for all accidents, including those occurring from negligence, at least the ordinary negligence of their servants, and requested the judge so to charge. ..... the opinion of the court, said: "a common carrier has in truth two distinct liabilities -- the one for losses by accident or mistake, where he is liable as an insurer; the other for losses by default or negligence, where he is ..... it was just and reasonable that they should not be responsible for losses happening by sheer accident, or dangers of navigation that no human skill or vigilance could guard against; it was just and reasonable that they should not be chargeable for money or other valuable articles liable to .....

R. S. N. Co. Ltd. and I. G. N. and Ry. Co. Ltd. Vs. Ram Kanai Madhab C ...

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : AIR1936Cal152

..... the evidence in the case establishes that there was negligence on the part of the serang, that the collision was not an inevitable accident, inasmuch as he could have but had not seen the boat with which the steamer collided when it was at a distance of 300 feet from the prow of the steamer; that a competent ..... the defendant has to prove that the collision was due to inevitable accident not arising from negligent navigation: see the annot lyle (1886) ..... but the proposition is well established that the plaintiff may have been guilty of negligence, and although that negligence, may, in part, have contributed to the accident, yet if the defendants could by exercise of ordinary care and diligence have avoided the mischief which happened, the plaintiffs' negligence will not excuse him: see radly v. l ..... dunn, the marine assistant of the defendants at the time of the accident, and who was on board the steamer at the time, deposed to these facts: there was no fog ..... correct for anybody to say that at that time of accident there was fog. ..... whether the accident was due to narain majhi keeping his boat in the deep navigable channel and not exhibiting any light ..... whether the accident was due to any negligence or rashness on the part of the master and senior serang of section section brahmin ..... about the proposition that the plaintiff in an action for negligence cannot succeed if it is found that he himself has been guilty of negligence or want of ordinary care which contributed to cause an accident. .....

Collis Line Private Ltd. Vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and anr.

Court : Kerala

Reported in : AIR1982Ker127

..... 'perils of the sea,' whether understood in its most limited sense, as importing a loss by natural accidents peculiar to that element, or whether understood in its more extended sense, as including inevitable accidents occurring upon that element, must still, in either case, be understood to include such losses only to the goods on board as are of an extraordinary nature or arise from some irresistible force, or from inevitable accident, or from some overwhelming power, which cannot be guarded against by the ordinary exertion of human skill ..... regarding the immunity under article iv rule 2 (c) the words 'perils, dangers and accidents of the sea or other navigable waters' mean perils or dangers or accidents peculiar to sea or navigable waters which could not have been reasonably foreseen and guarded against by ordinary skill and prudence by the carrier or his agents or servants. ..... in the circumstances the carrier has not established that the loss arose from any peril, danger or accident of the sea or navigable waters.12. ..... to come within the exception it must be a peril or danger of a character to which a marine adventure is inevitably subject. ..... (c) perils, dangers and accidents of the sea or other navigable waters: ....'8. ..... whether the accident was caused by peril such as storm, cyclone or tempest, we do not know. .....

Hannibal Railroad Vs. Swift

Court : US Supreme Court

..... its value may be properly included in the amount of damages, considering it only as part of the property which the company received as a common carrier of goods, and against the loss of which, from any cause but inevitable accident or the public enemy, it was, as such carrier, an insurer to the plaintiff. ..... to furnish brakemen, to be under the control of the conductor of the train, to accompany them, yet the company was held liable, as a common carrier, for injuries to the cars and the property of the plaintiff not caused by inevitable accident or the public enemy. ..... other property offered for transportation, and was responsible for the safe conveyance of the baggage and other property to the point for which they were destined, or the termination of the road, unless prevented by inevitable accident or the public enemy. .....

The Majestic

Court : US Supreme Court

..... . 597), means "inevitable accident, without the intervention of man and public enemies" and again (vol. 3, p ..... . 387 be held to have been the result of such inevitable accident ..... . in our opinion, the steamship company failed to show that the accident was one which could not have been prevented by human effort, sagacity, and care, and we perceive no reasonable ground for disagreeing with the judgment of the district court upon the facts ..... . if it had been shown that when the vessel sailed, the ports were in proper condition and properly closed, and that this was their condition on the day before the accident was discovered, that would have presented a different question ..... . 3 before the 25th, since leaving port, but afterwards that he was mistaken, and that he was down to the orlop "the day after we left queenstown," and that the accident might have occurred on any one of the intervening days ..... . 216) that "perils of the sea denote natural accidents peculiar to that element, which do not happen by the intervention of man, nor are to be prevented by human prudence ..... ." it was held that a mere notice from the steam packet company, without the passenger's assent, would not discharge it from performing its duty to carry safely and securely unless prevented by unavoidable accident .....