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

B N NANDAKUMAR – Appellant
Versus
THE BRANCH MANAGER – Respondent


The appeal is filed challenging the judgment and

award dated 12.07.2013 passed in MVC No.994/2009 on

the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge and MACT,

Tumkur.

2.

In this case, the accident in-question took

place on 10.01.2006 and the appellant/petitioner himself

was driving his car bearing Reg.No.KA-21/5522 and the

vehicle was damaged due to the accident. There is no

dispute that the vehicle is covered under the package

policy. After the accident, the petitioner made a claim for

vehicle damage before the insurance company submitting

the bills. The Insurance Company has paid Rs.1,07,474/-

and disallowed claim for Rs.69,327/- for want of bills.

3. The petitioner has filed a claim petition under

Section 166 of Indian Motor Vehicle Act, 1988. The Insurer

took a stand that the petition filed under Section 166 of

IMV Act is not maintainable by the owner-insured of the

vehicle. The Tribunal held that the petition itself is not

3

maintainable and rejected the petition on the ground that

the petition filed under Section 166 of the M.V. Act is not

maintainable by the owner of the vehicle against the

insurer in respect of damage caused to the vehicle of the

owner.

4.

Learned counsel

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