Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Scanned Judgements…!
Checking relevance for NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. VS MEGHJI NARAN SORATIYA...
2009 0 Supreme(SC) 381 : Under Section 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, if both the driver and owner of the vehicle remain absent and do not contest the claim before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, the insurer may be granted permission to contest the claim even on merits, including the issue of liability. The insurer''''s application under Section 170 specifically alleging the failure of the driver/owner to contest the claim is sufficient, and such an order by the Tribunal granting permission to the insurer cannot be interfered with, even if reasons are not recorded. Therefore, the owner and driver are not required to be present in a MAC appeal if they did not contest the case in the Tribunal.Checking relevance for United India Insurance Co. LTD. VS Jyotsnaben Sudhirbhai Patel...
2003 5 Supreme 529 : In a Motor Accident Claims (MAC) appeal, the owner and driver are not required to be parties if they did not contest the case before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. The judgment explicitly states that the driver and owner of the vehicle appeared before the Tribunal but did not file a written statement or give evidence, thus failing to contest the proceedings. The Supreme Court held that in such circumstances, the Insurance Company could be legitimately considered a ''''person aggrieved'''' under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act and entitled to file an appeal, even without the owner or driver participating. This implies that their absence from the appeal is permissible when they had already failed to contest the claim at the Tribunal stage.Checking relevance for United India Insurance Co. Ltd. VS Shila Datta...
Checking relevance for Shankarayya VS United India Insurance Company LTD. ...
1998 8 Supreme 579 : The owner and driver of the offending vehicle are not required to be parties in a Motor Accidents Claims (MAC) appeal if they did not contest the case before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. In this case, although the owner and driver appeared in the proceedings, they did not file a written statement, and thus were not actively contesting the claim. The Tribunal''''s award became final against them, and since they did not challenge the award before the Tribunal, they are not entitled to participate in the appeal. The Insurance Company, which was impleaded by the Tribunal under Section 170, was permitted to contest on merits only if it obtained a reasoned order from the Tribunal under that section—something it failed to do. Therefore, the absence of the owner and driver from the appeal is justified because they did not contest the claim at the tribunal level and their liability was already determined by the final award.Checking relevance for Ganesh Ghosh VS Shriram General Insurance Company Limited...
Checking relevance for Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. VS Gourango Debnath, S/o. Late Hari Charan Debnath...
Checking relevance for New India Asurance Co. Ltd. VS Md. Rafique Uddin S/O Late Rashid Ali...
2023 0 Supreme(Gau) 360 : The court held that the owner of the bus did not contest the case before the MACT despite having an opportunity to do so, and therefore, her statement in an affidavit (that there were only 13 passengers and no injuries occurred) could not be relied upon to dismiss the claim. The court emphasized that the failure to contest does not absolve the appellant from liability, and the learned Member of MACT did not commit any error in allowing the claim petition. This implies that even if the owner or driver does not appear or contest the case in a MAC appeal, they are still subject to the tribunal''''s decision, and their non-participation does not automatically lead to dismissal of the claim.Checking relevance for Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd VS Smti. Niru Devi W/o Late Dimbeswar Sarmah...
Checking relevance for Sita Ram, S/o. Amar Nath VS Reeta Devi, W/o. Kuldeep Raj...
Checking relevance for Divisional Manager, National Insurance Company Limited VS Prabitra Pradhan, W/o. Lt. Santa Bahadur...
Checking relevance for National Insurance Co. Ltd. VS Nasira Khan...
Checking relevance for United India Insurance Co. LTD. VS Bhushan Sachdeva...
2002 1 Supreme 177 : The insurance company, though not the owner or driver, is entitled to appeal before the High Court under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, when the insured (e.g., the driver) has not filed an appeal against the award of the Claims Tribunal. The court held that the insurance company falls within the ambit of ''''any person aggrieved by an award of a Claims Tribunal'''' and can invoke the right to appeal, even if the owner or driver did not contest the case in the MAC tribunal. Therefore, the owner or driver is not required to be a party to the appeal if they did not contest the case in the MAC tribunal, as the insurance company may step in and appeal on the basis of being aggrieved by the award.
