1. This appeal is by the Insurance company challenging the Judgment and Order passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chintamani, ['Tribunal', for short] in MVC No. 19/2007.

It is significant to note that the complaint was lodged by the father of the claimant on 19.1.2007 whereas the claim petition was filed by the minor claimant represented through his mother, natural ...

Ahmednagar, in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 22 Mr. K.D. Mote appearing for respondents no.01 and 02. He has proved the contents of the injury certificate. says that the said accident was caused ...

This is contrary to what has been stated in the FIR.

15. The first contention, therefore, has no merit. 21. All contentions on merit, therefore, fail. Constitution to relieve him of the necessity to serve his prison term.

date of appearance of the parties, in accordance with law. vi. All contentions of the parties are expressly kept open.

https://www.lawweb.in/2025/04/llm-notes-judicial-activism-in-india.html 4) LLM Notes: Judicial Process as an Instrument of Social Ordering in India https://www.lawweb ...

Thus, from a bare perusal of the order dated 09.05.2023, it is evident that the order imposing penalty dated 30.09.2008 and the rejection order dated 09.01.2013 were set aside on the ground of ...

The burden of proof is on the claimants. Same may be discharged on preponderance of probabilities. The insurer may lead independent evidence in disproof of the claim or it may point out that the ...

1. Present appeal has been filed by the original respondent No. 2 challenging the Judgment and Award passed in M.A.C.P. No. 112 of 2012 dated 06.01.2017 by learned Member, Motor Accident Claims ...

On a conspectus of the aforementioned authorities, it is evident that a clause for the forfeiture of earnest money is not penal in the ordinary sense, rendering Section 74 of the 1872 Act, ...