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

2005 Supreme(Kar) 353

ANAND BYRAREDDY
NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, KARNOOL, ANDHRA PRADESH – Appellant
Versus
GOVINDAMMA – Respondent


Advocates:
Mallikarjuna C.Basareddy, O.MAHESH

( 1 ) THE appeals in M. F. A. Nos. 7506 and 7507 of 2002 are by the insurance Company and the appeals in M. F. A. Nos. 748 and 749 of 2003 are by the claimants before the Commissioner for Workmen's compensation, Raichur ('the Commissioner for short ).

( 2 ) IT is seen that the proceedings before the Commissioner were not contested and in this light, the Commissioner has accepted the statements of the claimants in allowing the petitions and awarding compensation.

( 3 ) MR. O. Mahesh learned Counsel appearing for appellant-Insurance company draws my attention to the First Information Report (the 'fir' for short), which is placed on record by the claimants themselves, wherein it is stated that at the time of accident there were about 40 people travelling in the lorry as passengers and if this submission is to be accepted the claimants are not entitled for any compensation, since there is no statutory liability on the owner of a vehicle to get his vehicle insured for any passenger travelling in a goods vehicle and hence the insurers would not be liable to respect of the same. This proposition has been affirmed by the Apex Court in the case of National Insurance company Limited v Bommit





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