Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
Venkatesh Naik T., J
Proprietor Padma Rice Mil v. Khaja Hussain
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. introduction to appeal and context. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments regarding interest payments. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. court's exploration of statutory liabilities and insurance coverage. (Para 8 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 4. key facts surrounding the accident and insurance. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 5. final ruling regarding liability. (Para 17 , 18) |
1. Though this appeal is listed for admission, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, it is taken up for final disposal.
3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for respondent No. 2 - insurance company.
5. The learned counsel for the appellant relied upon the decision in the case of Ved Prakash Garg v. Premi Devi , 1998 ACJ 1 (SC), in support of his contention.
7. Learned counsel for respondent No. 2 relied upon the decision in the case of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Harshadbhai Amrutbhai Modhiya , 2006 ACJ 1699 (SC).
Whether appellant proved that respondent No. 2 - insurance company is liable to pay interest on the compensation amount?
10. The only short point involved in this case is, whether the owner - insured is liable or whether the insurance company is liable to pay interest on the co
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
