Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: contract of indemnity contract Sorted by: old Court: kerala Page 1 of about 1,426 results (0.022 seconds)

Aug 13 1957 (HC)

Sayu Mohammed Abdulla Vs. Neelakantan Krishnan and ors.

Court : Kerala

Reported in : AIR1958Ker322

..... shorten litigation or to do complete justice between the parties.'we therefore hold that the suit viewed as one for damages in enforcement of the contract of indemnity contained in the sale deed is not in any way barred.9. as the court below did not fix the quantum of damages in view ..... pillai thampatty v. kunhikavu thampan, 1956 ker lt 302 (j), where it was held after full discussion :'in a suit for damages for breach of contract of indemnity, express or implied, in writing registered, the period of limitation is governed by article 83 of the limitation act read with article 116, or in other ..... as contended by learned counsel for the appellants, the article applicable is article 116 read with article 83 in the light of the express covenant of indemnity, which we have found ext. b contained and so viewed, limitation will run only from the date of disturbance. it is enough for us to ..... they started and are entitled to claim consequential remedy by way of damages.6. the next question is as to the scope of the covenant of indemnity contained in the sale deed. it provided in effect that the vendors made themselves responsible to the vendee whenever any difficulty occurred in connection with ..... title and there was really no fraudulent misrepresentation by them in the matter as alleged. he denied that the warranty of title and the covenant for indemnity as contained in ext. b furnished any or sufficient cause of action for the plaintiffs' claim for damages, as sued for.he further pleaded that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 15 1961 (HC)

The Asiatic Government Security Fire and General Assurance Co. Ltd., M ...

Court : Kerala

Reported in : AIR1965Ker214

..... sub-section (4).10. the application of the doctrine of subrogation to policies of marine insurance is based upon the fundamental principle that the contract of insurance contained in a marine policy is a contract of indemnity, and of indemnity only. the assured in the case of a toss against which the policy was taken is entitled to be fully indemnified; but never to ..... '.12. the right of the insurer against the person responsible for the loss, however, does not rest upon any relation of contract or of privity between them. it arises out of the nature of the contract of marine insurance as a contract of indemnity, and is derived from the assured alone, and can be enforced in his right only.13. sub-section (1) of ..... in his own name.'14. as between the insurer and the assured, the insurer is entitled to the advantage of every right of the assured, whether such right consists in contract, fulfilled or unfulfilled, or in remedy for tort capableof being insisted on or already insisted. but as stated by the privy council in king v. victoria insurance co. ltd., 1896 ..... the beneficial interest therein, the assignee of the policy is entitled to sue thereon in his own name; and the defendant is entitledto make any defence arising out of the contract which he would have been entitled to make if the action had been brought in the name of the person by at on behalf of whom the policy was effected .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 13 1963 (HC)

The Bank of New India Ltd. Vs. G. Govinda Prabhu

Court : Kerala

Reported in : AIR1964Ker267

..... month and would himself pay, the reasonable view is, that the cause of action against him arose upon non-payment within in month. but it was urged, that as a contract of indemnity, a different result would follow. the rules at common law and in equity are stated thus in 16 halsbury's laws of england, 3rd edition, paragraphs 982 and 983 ..... at the request of the debtor becomes entitled to recover from him whatever sums he has rightfully paid under the guarantee as is provided in section 145, whereas in the contract of indemnity, the indemnifier cannot on the performance of the obligation of the debtor in the absence of an assignment from the creditor, sue in his own name, the debtor, as ..... the two cases. in this sense ext. f may be held to be a contract of indemnity, with a special term by which defendants 2 and 3 rendered themselves personally liable to pay, in case the debts were not discharged within one month. the subordinate judge ..... to accept the argument of counsel, that ext. f is evidence of repudiation by the plaintiff of the principal debt itself and that therefore it cannot be regarded as a contract of indemnity. the plaintiff considered that the loans were irregular, not that they were not true or that they were unenforceable. the principal debtors were of course the first defendant in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 16 1981 (HC)

Nellikka Achuthan Vs. Madras Motor and General Insurance Co. Ltd.

Court : Kerala

Reported in : [1983]54CompCas130(Ker)

..... that he even placed wooden pieces at the back of the wheel so as to prevent the bus from moving.5. section ii-1 of the contract of insurance provides (ex. a.-1 is the contract) for indemnity subject to the limits of liability including claimant's costs and expenses which the insured shall become legally liable to pay in respect of (1 ..... negligence of the appellant or his driver in this case (the decision in the earlier case being not binding on the insurance company), the company cannot be held liable. the indemnity that the insurance company has taken is in respect of loss or damage suffered by the insured on account of his being made legally liable for damages. in this connection ..... company was liable to pay the amount decreed as against him and costs thereon.2. the insurance company resisted the claim on the ground that it was liable under the contract of insurance only if the claim was made as a result of damage to the property caused by the use of the vehicle, that taking the vehicle for servicing and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 16 1982 (HC)

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. thekkeyil Rajan and ors.

Court : Kerala

Reported in : AIR1982Ker354; [1985]58CompCas40(Ker)

..... -katappa shetty v. b. n. lakshmiah, 1973 acc cj 306 : (air 1973 mys 350) has taken the view we have taken, namely, that the insurance policy is a personal contract for indemnity and lapses upon the transfer of the vehicle and that therefore the benefit of the policy would not be available to the transferee without an express agreement with the insurance ..... of the accident, nor the first defendant who was driving the vehicle at that time, as an employee of the 2nd defendant. the con-tract of insurance is a contract of personal indemnity and therefore the insured cannot transfer the benefits under a policy so long as such benefits are contingent in short an insurance policy cannot be transferred by the insured ..... insurer agreeing to such a transfer there is a novation of the contract by which the original assured is substituted by the new assured, the transferee to whom the policy has been transferred. it follows both defendants 1 and 2 cannot look to the 3rd defendant-insurance company for any indemnity on the basis of an insurance policy issued by the 3rd ..... defendant. 4. in peters v. general accident, and life assurance corpn. ltd., (1938) 60 li l rep 311 ca sir wilfrid greene, m. r. said : --'it appears to me to be as plain as anything can be that a contract of that kind isin its .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 27 1984 (HC)

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and C. Sahadevao and anr. Vs. E.K. Muhamm ...

Court : Kerala

Reported in : [1987]61CompCas490(Ker)

..... favour of the transferee. for this deeming provision to come into play, the condition precedent thereto should be fulfilled. a contract of insurance, being a contract of personal indemnity, the insured cannot transfer the benefits under the policy so long as such benefits are contingent. for that reason, ..... the name of the third respondent (transferee of the vehicle), neither the second respondent nor the third respondent had the right to claim indemnity against damages arising out of the accident involving the vehicle in question. 13. for a better appreciation of the legal position taken by ..... driver who is driving themotor car on the insured's order or with his permission provided that such driver:-- (a) is not entitled to indemnity under any other policy. ' 10. a permitted one p to drive his car ; then it met with an accident resulting in the death ..... indemnity between a particular driver and the company and had nothing to do with the liability which the driver had incurred to the third party for the injuries caused to it. in paragraph 22 of the decision, at page 1741, the supreme court observed (at page 702 of 34 comp cas): ' thus the contract ..... the insurance policy in the name of one could not be transferred by him without the consent of the insurer. true, on the insured agreeing to such transfer, there would be a novation of the contract .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 20 1986 (HC)

Kerala State Electricity Board Vs. Sundaram Estate

Court : Kerala

Reported in : (1987)IILLJ311Ker

..... -contractor in the relationship of principal to contractor?... the contractor referred to in section 12(2) is the contractor who contracts directly with the principal as defined in section 12(1). if therefore there is any further subletting of the contract, an indemnity cannot be obtained under the act and must be sought by recourse to the civil court....so stating the court ..... second category that where the principal's contractor is liable to pay compensation or to indemnify the principal, as provided under the sub. section, such contractor can in turn seek indemnity from his own contractor, who in relation to the principal, stands as a subcontractor, and who, being the immediate employer of the workman, is in terms of section 3, liable ..... to him in the relation of a contractor from whom the workman could have recovered compensation) and all questions us lo the right to and the amount of any such indemnity shall, in default of agreement, be settled by the commissioner.(3) nothing in this section shall be construed as preventing a workman from recovering compensation from the contractor instead of ..... held that the indemnity provided under section 12(2) was restricted to one indemnity, namely, between the principal and the original contractor.8. almost immediately after these .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 24 1987 (HC)

M. Swaminathan Vs. C.K. Jayalakshmi Amma and ors.

Court : Kerala

Reported in : II(1987)ACC299; [1989]66CompCas503(Ker)

..... [1985] 58 comp cas 40 (ker); [1982] klt 700. vadakkal j., speaking for the bench, held at p. 42.' the contract of insurance is a contract of personal indemnity and therefore the insured cannot transfer the benefit under a policy so long as such benefits are contingent. in short, an insurance policy cannot ..... court in b. p. venkatappa v. b. n. lakshmiah, air 1973 mys 350, held as follows (headnote):' an insurance policy is a personal contract between the parties for indemnifying the insured in case of an accident covered under the policy. thus, where the motor vehicle is transferred by an insured ..... insurance, whether that be a life or property or a liability to which he might be exposed. the absence of the required relationship will render the contract illegal, void or simply unenforceable, depending on the type of insurance ', (see page 24 chapter 3--' modern insurance law ' by john birds).12 ..... that the registered owner was one clement, the husband of the 8th respondent in mfa no. 415 of 1982 and the company had no contract with the appellant, and therefore there cannot be any liability arising out of the insurance policy. the appellant has contended that he has executed ..... be transferred by the insured without the consent of the insurer. on the insurer agreeing to such transfer, there is a novation of the contract .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 29 1988 (HC)

K.R. Visalakshi and ors. Vs. Pookodan Hamza and ors.

Court : Kerala

Reported in : I(1989)ACC30; AIR1989Ker192

..... air 1979 cal 152) and differed from that view for the following reasons :'it is a well settled principle of law that insurance is an indemnity contract and unless the owner is made liable, there is no liability on the insurer to indemnify the owner. hence it would not be correct to ..... the tribunal in those claim petitions.11. the finding of the tribunal in m.a.c. no. 170/82 was that the driver of the contract carriage alone was negligent. there is considerable force in the submission urged by the appellants that the tribunal should have considered all the claim petitions ..... avoidable anomaly.4. counsel for the respondents in this appeal objected to the entertainability of a joint appeal by the owner and insurer of the contract carriage. we submitted that the owner, who has not been made liable to any amount as compensation, has not suffered any legal grievance and ..... and negligence of both the drivers. consequently, the tribunal awarded recovery of the entire amount of compensation from the owner, driver and insurer of the contract carriage, whereas in the other four claims, the tribunal directed recovery of 50% of the amount of compensation alone from them, directing the other 50 ..... filed by the persons who were injured in an accident involving stage carriage no. klh 8204 which was proceeding from vazhikadavu to trichur, and a contract carriage bus no. ket 1714 which was proceeding from trichur to nadukani. the vehicles collided at a place called muppini in malappuram district on 1- .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 15 1988 (HC)

Mathew Koshy Vs. the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.

Court : Kerala

Reported in : 2(1988)ACC504

..... of money in the event of his disablement or death by accident. it resembles life insurance and differs from other classes of insurance and it is not a contract of indemnity but a mere contract to pay a sum of money in a certain contingency. the appellant has no case that the, policy issued to him by the respondent is a personal accident ..... owner himself suffers an injury in an accident, he does not acquire any right to get compensation from the insurance company under the policy issued by the respondent is a contract of indemnity to satisfy the conditions laid down under section 95 of the act. the ingredients of the law of insurance are nowhere provided in the special statute. necessarily therefore the ..... to failure to perform a legal obligation.8. for other reasons also the claim put forward by the appellant is not sustainable. a contract of insurance in the widest sense of the term may be defined as a contract whereby one person called the 'insurer' undertakes in return for the agreed consideration called the 'premium' to pay to another person called the .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //