w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



The Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Ltd., Presently represented by its The Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd., Chennai v/s Shivanand & Another


Company & Directors' Information:- G-ALLIANCE PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U20299KL2020PTC061648

Company & Directors' Information:- CHENNAI INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U67200TN2000PLC045622

Company & Directors' Information:- R S ALLIANCE PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U80903GJ2008PTC052540

Company & Directors' Information:- I.N. INSURANCE COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U67200DL1994PTC062554

Company & Directors' Information:- SUNDARAM & COMPANY LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U67120TN1942PLC002584

    Miscellaneous First Appeal No. 31383 of 2013 (MV)

    Decided On, 09 March 2018

    At, High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench OF Kalaburagi

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAGHVENDRA S. CHAUHAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. DEVDAS

    For the Appellant: M. Sudarshan, Advocate. For the Respondents: R1, Babu H. Metagudda, R2, Santosh Biradar, Advocates.



Judgment Text

(Prayer: This MFA is filed under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, against the judgment and award dated 04.04.2013 passed in MVC No.339/2012 on the file of the I Addl. Senior Civil Judge and M.A.C.T. at Gulbarga, partly allowing the petition and awarding the compensation amount of Rs.15,32,000/- with interest @ 6% p.a.)

Raghvendra S. Chauhan, J.

1. The Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Limited is aggrieved by the award, dated 04.04.2013, passed by the I Addl. Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Gulbarga (henceforth to be referred to as the 'learned Tribunal'), whereby the learned Tribunal has granted a compensation of Rs.15,32,000/- along with an interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of realisation to the respondent- claimant Shivanand, a 32 years old young man, who become paraplegic due to a vehicular accident.

2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that on 10.02.2010, about 1.00 a.m., the claimant, and one Somashekhar were returning to their village in a Tractor-Trailer, after unloading the agricultural produce at APMC Market Yard. When their Tractor-Trailer was near Hipperga village, situated on the Jewargi-Sindagi road, a lorry, bearing Reg. No.KA-32/B-1007, being driven rashly and negligently, dashed against the Tractor-Trailer. Consequently, the respondent-claimant fell down on the ground and sustained grievous injuries, namely post traumatic parapledgia, and traumatic compression, fracture D11 vertebra, retropulsed fracture fragment causing significant indentation over spinal cord. Immediately, he was rushed to the Government General Hospital at Gulbarga. At the hospital, the doctors reffered the respondent-claimant to the Basaveshwara Hospital. At the Basaveshwara Hospital, he was an inpatient for about four days. Subsequently, he was taken to the Yashodhara Hospital, Solapur, where he was not only an inpatient, but also underwent an operation. According to the respondent-claimant, he incurred about Rs.6.00 lakhs towards the medical expenses alone. Due to the accident, he has become totally paralyzed. Therefore, he filed a clam petition before the learned Tribunal.

3. In order to support his case, the respondent- claimant, examined himself as PW.1, and Dr. Raju Kulkarni as PW.2, and submitted fifteen documents. On the other hand, the Insurance Company examined a single witness, and submitted two documents. After appreciating the evidence submitted by both the sides, the learned Tribunal granted the compensation to the respondent-claimant as aforementioned. Hence, this appeal by the Insurance Company.

4. The learned counsel for the appellant has raised three contentions before this Court: firstly, since it was a head on collision between the two vehicles, the learned Tribunal should have treated this case as a case of contributory negligence. Therefore, the learned Tribunal was not justified in imposing entire liability upon the driver, the owner and the Insurance Company of the offending vehicle. Secondly, although the driver of the offending vehicle had a licence to drive a light motor vehicle, but at the time of driving the lorry, in fact he was driving a heavy motor vehicle. Therefore, he did not have a valid licence to drive the offending vehicle. Hence, the Insurance Company could not have been imposed with the liability to pay the compensation to the respondent-claimant. Lastly, Dr. Raju Kulkarni (PW.2) is an Orthopedic Surgeon, but was not the treating doctor. Therefore, his testimony could not be accepted. Although, Dr. Kulkarni (PW.2) has assessed the disability of the respondent-claimant as 90% of the whole body as per Ex.P11, since he was not the treating doctor, his testimony should have been ignored. Therefore, the learned Tribunal was not justified in concluding that the respondent-claimant had suffered 90% of disability of the whole body.

5. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent No.1-claimant, Mr. Babu H. Metagudda, has pleaded that the learned Tribunal has relied upon both oral and documentary evidence to come to the conclusion that it is the offending vehicle, which was being driven so rashly and negligently that when it collided with the Tractor-Trailer, it went on the wrong side, that is towards the right side of the road, and into the kaccha part. Thus, the negligence of the driver is writ large in this case. Secondly, the appellant has not produced any evidence with regard to the fact that the driver did not have a valid driving licence. A mere statement does not buttress the plea. Therefore, the appellant was required to produce sufficient evidence to prove its plea. Since it had failed to discharge the burden, the learned Tribunal was certainly justified in rejecting the plea that the driver did not have a valid driving licnece. Thirdly, even if Dr. Kulkarni (PW.2) is not a treating doctor, the learned Tribunal has noticed, in the impugned award, that the respondent-claimant was brought to the Court on a wheel chair, and both his lower limbs were almost not working. Thus, it would be obvious that the respondent-claimant had become physically dis-functional. Hence, the learned Tribunal was justified in believing the testimony of Dr. Kulkarni (PW.2) that 90% of the body was disabled, due to the injuries suffered in the vehicular accident. Hence, the learned counsel has supported the impugned award.

6. Heard the learned counsel for the parteis, and perused the impugned award.

7. A bare perusal of the impugned award clearly reveals that in his testimony, the respondent- claimant had clearly stated that it is the offending vehicle, which was being driven rashly and negligently, which came and collided with the Tractor-Trailer, in which he was travelling. Since he is an injured witness, he is the star witness of the case. Despite subjecting him to a lengthy cross-examination, the witness could not be shattered. Therefore, the learned Tribunal was justified in relying on his oral testimony.

8. Moreover, the Tribunal has considered the documentary evidence: firstly, the Complaint (Ex.P1a) lodged by the co-traveler Mr. Somashekhar; secondly, the fact that after a thorough investigation, the police had charge-sheeted the driver of the offending vehicle; thirdly, the fact that the respondent-claimant, in his statement given to the police under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., had made a specific allegation against the driver of the offending vehicle. And most importantly, the spot mahazar (Ex.P3), which clearly reveals that the offending vehicle went on the wrong side towards the right side and dashed against the Tractor-Trailer. Furthermore, the fact that according to the IMV report (Ex.P4), a heavy damage has been caused to both the vehicles, thus clearly indicating that the vehicles had collided with each other with great force. The spot mahazar (Ex.P3) further reveals that after dashing the tractor and trailer, the offending vehicle went completely towards the right side, it left the tar road, and went into the kachha part, on the side of the road. Considering the ample documentary evidence, the learned Tribunal was justified in holding that the negligence lay solely on the shoulder of the driver of the offending vehicle. Therefore, the contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellant that since the vehicles had collided head on, a presumption should be drawn that it is a case of contributory negligence, the said contention is belied by the record itself. Hence, the submission is unacceptable.

9. As far as the plea with regard to the driving licence is concerned, suffice it to say that it was the duty of the Insurance Company to establish its plea through cogent and convincing evidence. However, the appellant - Insurance Company has failed to do so. During the course of the proceeding, the appellant did not take any steps to produce any documentary or oral evidence to establish its plea. It is only at the fag end of the trial, in fact, after the final arguments were over, and the case was scheduled for pronouncement of judgment, suddenly an application was filed by the Insurance Company for reopening the case by producing one driving license extract, and by praying that the RTO, Gulbarga should be summoned as a witness. Relying on the Division Bench decision of this Court rendered in Rabiya Bi Kassim M /Vs/ The Country Wide Consumer Financial Service Limited (ILR 2004 KAR 2215), the learned Tribunal was justified in concluding that after the final arguments are over, and a case is kept only for pronouncement of judgment, nothing is required to be done by the Tribunal except to pronounce the judgment itself. Therefore, during this interim period, a party cannot file an application for reopening its case. Thus, the learned Tribunal is certainly justified in drawing the conclusion that the appellant has failed to establish its plea that the driver did not have a valid driving licence.

10. Although it is true that Dr. Kulkarni (PW.2) was not the treating doctor, he is merely an Orthopedic Surgeon, but he has given his opinion based on the disability certificate (Ex.P11). More importantly, the learned Tribunal has noticed the condition of the respondent-claimant when he was brought on a wheel chair into the Court. The learned Tribunal has clearly noticed the fact that both the lower limbs of the respondent-claimant were dis-functional. According to the testimony of the respondent-claimant, he is unable to carry out his daily chores and he requires an attendant even for answering the call of Nature. Thus, it would be obvious to any Court, even if the medial witness was not produced by the respondent-claimant, that the claimant has turn into

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

a vegetable. Therefore, due to the injuries suffered by the respondent in a vehicular accident, his body had become totally dis-functional. Hence, the conclusion drawn by the learned Tribunal that the respondent has suffered 90% disability of the whole body cannot be fault by this Court. Therefore, the third and last contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellant is clearly unsustainable. For the reasons stated above, this Court does not find any merit in the present appeal; the same is, hereby, dismissed. The statutory amount deposited before this Court by the Insurance Company shall be transmitted to the concerned Tribunal. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the entire compensation amount, along with an interest at the rate of 6% p.a., from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of realisation with the Tribunal within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. The Tribunal is directed to disburse the said amount forthwith in favour of the respondent-claimant.
O R







Judgements of Similar Parties

04-08-2020 Birla Sun Life Insurance Co. Ltd. & Now Known As Aditiya Birla Sun Life Insurance Co. Ltd.), Maharashtra & Another Versus Narendra Pundlik Ramteke National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
04-08-2020 Kaizen Organics Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur Versus National Insurance Co. Ltd. & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
31-07-2020 National Insurance Co. Ltd. Through Rajesh Kumar Dy. Manager, New Delhi Versus Biking Food Products (P) Ltd., Telangana National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
28-07-2020 M/s. Royal Sundaram Alliance General Insurance Co.Ltd., Rep.by its Branch Manager, Cantonment Versus Kaanikkaimery & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
27-07-2020 Tata AIG Life Insurance Co. Ltd., Maharashtra Versus Mampi Dhar (Gosh) & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
27-07-2020 IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd., Maharashtra Versus Ashok Laxman Mane & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
27-07-2020 Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Through Its Duly Constituted Attorney, Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., New Delhi Versus Vikash Kumar National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
24-07-2020 Gurbax Singh Banga Versus Aviva Life Insurance Co. India Pvt. Ltd., Punjab & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
24-07-2020 National Insurance Company Limited Through Its Duly Constituted Attorney Manager, New Delhi Versus M/s. D.D Spinners Pvt. Ltd., Panipat National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
22-07-2020 Reliance Nippon Life Insurance Co. Ltd., Maharashtra Versus Sujoy Chatterjee National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
21-07-2020 SBI Life Insurance Co. Ltd., West Bengal Versus Kajari Gayen & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
21-07-2020 Ex-Subedar Vinod Kumar Sharma Versus National Insurance Co. Ltd. National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
20-07-2020 Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. & Another Versus Mahesh Gundappa Gouder In the High Court of Bombay at Goa
20-07-2020 National Insurance Co. Ltd. Through National Legal Vertical, New Delhi Versus M/s. Krishna Spico Industries Pvt. Ltd., Ghaziabad & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
17-07-2020 Branch Manager, Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited, Chhattisgarh Versus Ansat Siya & Others High Court of Chhattisgarh
16-07-2020 Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. Versus Chandan Tulsidas Gauthankar & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Goa
10-07-2020 IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Co. Limited, Chhattisgarh Versus Kamin Bai & Others High Court of Chhattisgarh
10-07-2020 Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. Versus Matilda Fernandes & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Goa
10-07-2020 Life Insurance Corporation of India Through Its Additional Secretary (Legal), New Delhi Versus Anil Laxman Matade National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
06-07-2020 National Insurance Co. Ltd., Chennai Versus A. Badurinssa & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
06-07-2020 M/s. Liberty General Insurance Limited (formerly known as M/s. Liberty Videocon General Insurance Co. Ltd. Versus Md. Haseena & Others High Court of for the State of Telangana
02-07-2020 Life Insurance Corporation of India, through Manager (L & HPF), (CG) Versus Dhanya Kumar Jain & Others High Court of Chhattisgarh
01-07-2020 M/s. Gulabchand Shankar Versus Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Rajasthan & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
30-06-2020 M/s. United India Insurance Company Limited Versus Md. Khayyumkhan & Others High Court of for the State of Telangana
26-06-2020 Reliance Life Insurance Co. Ltd. & Another Versus Girijabai & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
26-06-2020 Reliance Nippon Life Insurance Co. Ltd. & Another Versus Sajal Kumar Banerjee National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
25-06-2020 Amar Plastics Versus Iffco-Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd. & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
25-06-2020 United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Versus Amar Singh Raghuwanshi National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
25-06-2020 M/s. Goodwill Leather Art Rep By its Prop Md Quddus ALi Alias Md Quddus Ali Molla Versus National Insurance Co. Ltd. & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
23-06-2020 M/s. Jain Textiles, Ashok Jain Versus United India Insurance Company Ltd. National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
19-06-2020 Ram Avtar Versus National Insurance Co. Ltd. National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
18-06-2020 Jaspreet Singh Bakshi Versus SBI General Insurance Company Ltd., Chandigarh & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
18-06-2020 Rajendra Singh & Others Versus National Insurance Company Limited & Others Supreme Court of India
16-06-2020 Savitha Versus M/s. Cholamandalam M.S. General Insurance Co. Ltd. & Others Supreme Court of India
15-06-2020 Piara Ram Versus National Insurance Co. Ltd. Through Its Manager, Punjab National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
12-06-2020 M.H. Uma Maheshwari & Others Versus United India Insurance Co. Ltd. & Another Supreme Court of India
05-06-2020 M.S. Jayaprakash & Another G. Sundaram (died) & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
05-06-2020 M/s. ORJ Electronics Oxides Ltd., By its Managing Director O.R.J. Jaffar Batcha & Director V. Sundaram & Others Versus State by Inspector of Police, SPE, CBI, Economic Offence Wing, Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
05-06-2020 Vinita Sethi Versus ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Company Ltd. & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
04-06-2020 M/s. United India Insurance Company Limited, Chennai Versus N. Prathap & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
01-06-2020 P. Subramanian Versus The Insurance Ombudsman, Teynampet & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
19-05-2020 Branch Manager Tata AIG General Insurance Company Limited, Bilaspur C.G. Versus Kashi Ram Sahu & Others High Court of Chhattisgarh
24-04-2020 Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. & Another Versus The State of Madhya Pradesh Supreme Court of India
17-04-2020 Diljit Singh Bindra Versus Life Insurance Corporation of India Supreme Court of India
17-04-2020 South Durban Community Environmental Alliance Versus MEC For Economic Development, Tourism And Environmental Affairs Kwazulu-Natal Provincial Government & Another Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa
23-03-2020 The Branch Manager, National Insurance Company Limited, Sikkim Versus Bishal Chettri & Another High Court of Sikkim
20-03-2020 Oriental Insurance Company Limited Through Chief Manager Versus Arvind Kumar Jain National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
20-03-2020 Branch Manager, Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Co. Ltd., Punjab & Others Versus Dalbir Kaur National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
18-03-2020 United India Insurance Company Limited Versus Mora Devi High Court of Rajasthan Jodhpur Bench
13-03-2020 Ashawati Singh & Others Versus Life Insurance Corporation off India, Thrpugh Divisional Manager, Allahabad National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
13-03-2020 The National Insurance Co. Ltd., Kolkata, through its Regional Manager Versus Marotrao & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur
13-03-2020 IFFCO-TOKIO General Insurance Co. Ltd., Represented by its Manager, K.S.C.M.F. Buildings, Bangalore Versus Mageswari & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
13-03-2020 The Branch Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd. Versus Suchandra Basak West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
12-03-2020 United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Tiruppur Versus Kaveriammal & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
12-03-2020 The Branch Manager, Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Tiruvannamalai Versus Poongavanam & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
12-03-2020 M/s. National Insurance Co. Ltd., Puducherry Versus Rani & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
12-03-2020 The Branch Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd. Versus Subhash Mahanta West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
12-03-2020 National Insurance Co. Ltd., National Legal Vertical (Legal Cell), New Delhi Versus Biswadeb Koley & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
11-03-2020 M/s. United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Div. Office- I, Secunderabad Versus Syed Mohd. Rayees & Another High Court of for the State of Telangana
11-03-2020 M/s. National Insurance Co. Ltd., Basheerbagh, Hyderabad through local branch at Khammam Versus F.R. Phillip High Court of for the State of Telangana
11-03-2020 Agrocel Industries Pvt. Ltd. Versus United India Insurance Company Ltd. High Court of Judicature at Bombay
11-03-2020 S. Mahadevan Versus The General Manager, (Appellate Authority) Personnel Department, United India Insurance Company Ltd., Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
11-03-2020 Divisional Manager, M/s. Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Company Limited, Chennai Versus Anandan & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
11-03-2020 Renuga Meenakshi Sundaram Versus The Chief Educational Officer, Sivagangai & Others Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
10-03-2020 M/s. Professional Management Consultants (P) Ltd., Chennai Versus Employees State Insurance Corporation, Rep by its Joint Director, Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
09-03-2020 The Branch Manager, M/s The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Through Divisional Manager Versus Jayanti Devi & Others High Court of Jharkhand
06-03-2020 National Insurance Co. Ltd., Rajasthan & Another Versus Bhawal Synthetics India Ltd., Rajasthan & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
06-03-2020 Poonam Devi & Others Versus Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Supreme Court of India
06-03-2020 The Oriental Insurance Co., Ltd., Palghad, Kerala State Versus M. Arul @ Arulkumar & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
06-03-2020 Mumtaz & Others Versus The National Insurance Co. Ltd., & Another High Court of Karnataka
05-03-2020 The Divisional Manager, Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Vellore Versus R. Damodharan & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
05-03-2020 National Insurance Co. Ltd., Chennai Versus S. Chitirai Pandian & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
05-03-2020 Divisional Manager, Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Divisional Office, Mythe Estate, Kaithu, Shimla, Himachala Pradesh Versus Bir Singh Rana National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
05-03-2020 K.M. Suresh Babu Versus M/s. Sundaram Finance Limited, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
05-03-2020 United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Chennai Versus B. Sudha & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
04-03-2020 Nirmala Kothari Versus United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Supreme Court of India
04-03-2020 The Divisional Manager, The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Tiruvannamalai Versus Suresh Kumar & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
03-03-2020 The Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd., Broadway, Chennai & Another Versus G. Saravanan & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
03-03-2020 M/s. Deluxe Enterprises, H.P. Versus Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Punjab National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
03-03-2020 Pachayammal (Died) & Others Versus M/s. Sundaram Finance Limited, Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
03-03-2020 Life Insurance Corporation Of India Through Its Additional Secretary(Legal), New Delhi Versus Raj Vilas Dongre & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
03-03-2020 Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd., Salem Versus Parameshwari & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
03-03-2020 United India Insurance Company Limited Versus Yechuri Nirmala & Others High Court of for the State of Telangana
02-03-2020 Branch Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd., Represented by Regional Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd., Bengaluru Versus Latha & Others High Court of Karnataka
02-03-2020 Geetha & Others Versus United India Insurance Company Limited, Neyveli High Court of Judicature at Madras
02-03-2020 The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Represented by its Manager, Dharmapuri Versus Venkatraman & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
02-03-2020 Employees State Insurance Corporation, Represented by Its Director General, New Delhi & Others Versus Dr. P.S. Naina High Court of Kerala
02-03-2020 V.M. Bijili & Another Versus Sundaram Finance Limited, Rep. by its Manager (Legal), Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
02-03-2020 Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd., Chennai Versus Abutahir & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
02-03-2020 G.T.P. Transport Company, Swaranpuri, Salem & Another Versus National Insurance Company Ltd., Divisional Manager, Salem & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
02-03-2020 M/s. Bharti AXA General Insurance Co. Ltd., Doddaanekundi, Bangalore Versus Narasimman & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
28-02-2020 ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Company Limited, Represented by its Authorised Signatory & Others Versus Chittipolu Uma Telangana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Hyderabad
28-02-2020 V. Ramalingam & Another V/S K.S. Sundaram And Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
28-02-2020 M/s. Techno Global Services Pvt. Ltd. & Another Versus National Insurance Co. Ltd. & Others West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
27-02-2020 M/s. Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd., Chennai Versus Karmi Devi & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
27-02-2020 National Insurance Co. Ltd. Versus Bhagwan Bhika Shirsath & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
26-02-2020 The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Chennai Versus M. Baby Rani & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
26-02-2020 M/s. Food Corporation of India, Represented by its Area Manager, Coimbatore Versus Employees State Insurance Corporation, Represented by its Deputy Director, Coimbatore High Court of Judicature at Madras
25-02-2020 Life Insurance Corporation of India Versus Mukesh Poonamchand Shah Supreme Court of India
25-02-2020 P. Sundaram & Others Versus The Revenue Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras