SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1991 Supreme(Kar) 182

M.P.CHANDRAKANTARAJ
ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. – Appellant
Versus
EAST INDIA TRANSPORT AGENCIES – Respondent


Advocates:
S.P.SHANKAR, U.Ashok

M. P. CHANDRAKANTARAJ, J.

( 1 ) SMALL Causes Courts Act is by the plaintiff. Plaintiff is Oriental Insurance Company limited. It presented the suit for recovery of Rs. 5,993. 85 from the defendant - East India transport Agency in view of the fact that certain goods insured by the plaintiff for the consignor were not delivered. In that circumstance, insured issued notice under Section 10 of the Common carriers Act and Insurance Company settled the claim in the sum of Rs, 5,093. 85 as against the claim of the consignor in the sum of Rs. 6,124. 88, therefore the insurer presented the suit.

( 2 ) THE facts themselves are not in dispute. The suit came to be dismissed on the short ground that the consignor also was not made a party. Plaintiff was also found fault with inasmuch as the cause title disclosed was written by the Regional Manager, while the Deputy manager had signed and verified the plaint averments.

( 3 ) ONCE the Insurance Company settled the claim, all rights which the consignor had to recover the value of the property entrusted to the carrier, as damages automatically ensures to the benefit of the insurer. He need not seek a separate assignment of the right to sue. Once the





Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top