Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: contract of indemnity contract Sorted by: recent Year: 2002 Page 1 of about 1,002 results (0.043 seconds)

Nov 18 2002 (HC)

V. Ramanujam Vs. Karnataka State Financial Corporation and ors.

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Nov-18-2002

Reported in : III(2003)BC20; 2003(1)KarLJ585

..... .'section 4(1)(b).--nothing in section 3 shall affect any right or remedy against any person other than a person referred to in that section, in respect of a contract or indemnity or guarantee entered into in relation to an agreement referred to in that section or in respect of any interest referred to in clause (a)'.a closer reading of ..... guarantee.'section 127.--anything done, or any promise made, for the benefit of the principal debtor, may be a sufficient consideration to the surety for giving the guarantee'.5. a contract of guarantee is a single transaction to which there are three parties--creditor, principal debtor and guarantor. therefore, the clause 'where any person is a party to any agreement relating ..... . the argument no doubt looked attractive but, on a closer analysis of the provisions of sections 3 and 4 of the act and sections 126 and 127 of the indian contract act, the same has to be discarded.3. the karnataka public monies (recovery of dues) act, is an act which was enacted mainly for the purpose of providing for speedy ..... party to the agreement relating to loan is liable to pay the amount stated in the loan transaction.4. section 126 of the indian contract act defines a contract of guarantee as follows.-'section 126a contract of guarantee is a contract to perform the promise or discharge the liability of a third person in case of his default. the person who gives the guarantee .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 11 2002 (HC)

Gammon India Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Nov-11-2002

Reported in : 2003(1)ARBLR353(Delhi)

..... be commensurate with the magnitude of works and fair to both the parties.limitation of liability:-we request inclusion of provision in the contract whereby 'the aggregate liability of contractor to the employer (whether based on contract, indemnity, warranty, guarantee, including negligence and strict or absolute liability, or arising out of a breach of statutory duty or otherwise) ..... arising out of or in connection with the work under the contract shall not exceed 50% of the contract price.'regarding suggestion relating to 'extension of time and ..... quality or performance of the works.(ii) which limits in any substantial way, inconsistent with the tender documents the employer's rights or the tenderers obligations under this contract or(iii) whose rectification would affect unfairly the competitive position of other tenderers presenting substantially responsive tenders or(iv) which, in the opinion of the employer or engineer ..... and for delay in providing client's issue materials without providing any compensation in terms of costs. the bidder requests for inclusion of suitable provisions in the contract whereby the contractor be eligible for compensation in addition to extension of completion time in the event of delay not attributable to the contractor and for delay in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 24 2002 (HC)

New India Assurance Company Limited Vs. Andhra Fishermen Central Co-op ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Oct-24-2002

Reported in : I(2003)ACC303; AIR2003AP231; 2003(1)ALD299

..... and tear. there must be some casualty, something which could not be foreseen, as one of the necessary incidents of the adventure. the purpose of the policy (or contract) is to secure an indemnity against accidents which may happen, not against events which must happen. not only losses which are occasioned by extraordinary violence of the winds or waves are losses by ..... winds and waves, not comprehended in the ordinary wear and tear of the voyage or directly referable to the acts and negligence of the assures as it proximate cause. in contracts of sea carriage, the words 'perils of the sea' have been defined as 'sea damage occurring at sea and nobody is at fault'. (lopes l.j., quoted in hamilton v ..... in thames and mersey m.i.c. v.hamilton, (1887) 122 app.cas. 492) the expression has the same meaning in a contract of sea carriage as it has in a marine policy; but in the case of a contract of carriage the court looks to what has been termed the remote as distinguished from the proximate cause of damage, whereas in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 01 2002 (HC)

The New India Assurance Company Ltd., Through Its Regional Manager Vs. ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Oct-01-2002

Reported in : II(2003)ACC677; 2003ACJ1454; (2003)133PLR783

..... insurance which stipulates to pay compensation for the death of the insured person himself cannot be said to be a contract of indemnity. if the owner of the vehicle, who has the benefit of indemnity is himself not covered by the policy, his representatives unless he be an employee covered by the first proviso to section 5(1)(b) is in no better ..... is to be compensated. their lordships of the karnataka high court held that owner of the karnataka high court held that owner of the vehicle who has the benefit of indemnity is himself not covered and his representative is in no better position unless he be an employee covered by the first proviso of section 85(1)(b) of the act ..... .e. his father. in that case, the son of the owner of the goods vehicle was accompanying the goods and not as an employee. it was observed that basically a contract of motor insurance seeks to indemnify the owner of the vehicle against liability arising out of claims of third parties arising against the insured owner out of the use of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 22 2002 (HC)

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Krishna Khatua and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Aug-22-2002

Reported in : III(2004)ACC176,2003ACJ1974

..... account of an accident involving the vehicle, the insurer will indemnify the owner. therefore, when the owner dies in the accident involving the motor vehicle, the contract of indemnity will not cover such case as the owner of the offending vehicle is not to pay compensation to any other person. strong reliance was placed on the judgment in the ..... .4. relying on the aforesaid judgments, the learned counsel for the appellant contended that the insurer's liability is on the contract of indemnity entered into between insurer and the owner of the vehicle and the principle behind the contract of indemnity is that where the owner of a motor vehicle is compelled to pay compensation to persons who suffered injury or damage on ..... by policy. judgments cited by the appellant particularly in the cases of siddanna nimbanna jawali, : ilr2001kar1670 ; darshan kaur, and hemlata sahu, : 1999(2)mplj231 , support such view.7. from the contract of insurance the liability for bodily injury of the owner-insured, has not been shown. as the policy is comprehensive only the additional claim can be damage for the property .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 19 2002 (HC)

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Chandra Kali and anr.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Aug-19-2002

Reported in : 2004ACJ614; 2002(4)AWC3243; [2002(95)FLR50]; (2003)ILLJ124All

..... is under workmen's compensation act or under the provisions of the motor vehicles act. however, it cannot be ignored that a contract of insurance is a contract of indemnity, against liabilities arising from the risk covered by the insurance policy, while the liability for penalty arises from violation of the provisions ..... parties flows from the statute and is not contractual, yet so far as the insurer and the insured are concerned, the insurance is a personal contract of indemnity. the liability of the insurer is co-extensive with the liability incurred by the owner of the vehicle, the insured. if the insurer and ..... it has been held by the delhi high court that, 'the liability of the insurance company can be limited either by the statute or by the contract of the insurance.'59. considering the scheme and scope of the relevant provisions of two enactments, i.e., motor vehicles act and workmen compensation act, ..... the company about the incident, at all by owner of the truck, the owner has committed a breach of legal provisions as well as insurance contract. this is also question of fact and not the question of law.30. the next question raised by the appellant is whether the workmen compensation ..... informing the company about the incident at all by the owner of the truck, the owner has committed breach of legal provisions as well as insurance contract? (3) whether the tribunal is entitled to pass an award against the insurance company?27. according to the proviso of section 30 of the workmen .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 24 2002 (HC)

Ram Bahadur Singh and anr. Vs. Tehsildar and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Jul-24-2002

Reported in : 2003(1)ARBLR61(All)

..... bar a suit or affect any other right or remedy against any person other than a person referred to in that section, in respect of a contract of indemnity or guarantee entered into a relation to an agreement referred to in that section or in respect of any interest referred to in clause (a). ..... first proceed under section 29 of the act. such an order is wholly against the provisions of the state financial corporation act and also the contract act. the impugned order dated 6.1.2001 therefore cannot be sustained and has to be set aside.' 25. this cr.se again shows ..... '128. the liability of the surety is co-extensive with that of the principal-debtor, unless it is otherwise provided by the contract.' in view to the said provision, it is evident that the guarantor cannot insist that the creditor should first proceed against the principal-debtor and, thereafter ..... established that it is open to the creditor to proceed against the guarantors without first proceeding against the principal-debtor. 15. section 128 of the indian contract act clearly lays down that the liability of the guarantor is co-extensive with that of the principal-debtor. the said section 128 is quoted below: ..... -debtor nor the surety discharged the admitted liability of the principal-debtor in spite of demands. under section 128 of the indian contract act, save as provided in the contract, the liability of the surety is co-extensive with that of the principal-debtor. the surety became thus liable to pay the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 23 2002 (HC)

Radhey Shyam Garg and anr. Vs. Uttar Pradesh Financial Corporation and ...

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Jul-23-2002

Reported in : I(2003)BC61; (2003)1UPLBEC932

..... (b) bar a suit or affect any other right or remedy against any person other than a person referred to in that section, in respect of a contract of indemnity or guarantee entered into a relation to an agreement referred to in that section or in respect of any interest referring to in clause (a). (2) ..... financial corporation to first proceed under section 29 of the act. such an order is wholly against the provisions of the state financial corporation act and also the contract act. the impugned order dated6.1.2001 therefore cannot be sustained and has to be set aside.' 30. applying this principle to the present case, it ..... the principal debtor nor the surety discharged the admitted liability of the principal debtor in spite of demands. under section 128 of the indian contract act, save as provided in the contract, the liability of the surety is co-extensive with that of the principal debtor. the surety became thus liable to pay the entire amount ..... guarantor. it is the right of the decree-holder to proceed with it in a way he likes. section 128 of the indian contract act itself provides that 'the liability of the surety is co-extensive with that of the principal debtor, unless it is otherwise provided by the ..... contract.' the supreme court further held (paragraph 18 of the said air): '18. it will be noticed that the guarantor alone could have been sued, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 19 2002 (HC)

Kailash Chand JaIn Vs. Uttar Pradesh Financial Corporation and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Jul-19-2002

Reported in : 2003(1)ARBLR110(All); [2004]55SCL54(All)

..... (b) bar a suit or affect any other right or remedy against any person other than a person referred to in that section, in respect of a contract of indemnity or guarantee entered into a relation to an agreement referred to in that section or in respect of any interest referred to in clause (a). (2) ..... to examine the facts and circumstances of each case.39. there can be no doubt that in view of the provisions of section 138 of the indian contract act, liability of the guarantor is co-extensive with that of the principal borrower. in view of the various decisions discussed above, it is evident that ..... corporation to first proceed under section 29 of the act. such an order is wholly against the provisions of the state financial corporation act and also the contract act. the impugned order dated 6-1-2001 therefore cannot be sustained and has to be set aside.'29. applying this principle to the present case, ..... the principal debtor nor the surety discharged the admitted liability of the principal debtor in spite of demands. under section 128 of the indian contract act. save as provided in the contract, the liability of the surety is co-extensive with that of the principal debtor. the surety became thus liable to pay the entire amount ..... guarantor. it is the right of the decree-holder to proceed with it in a way he likes. section 128 of the indian contract act itself provides that the liability of the surety is co-extensive with that of the principal debtor, unless it is otherwise provided by the .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 17 2002 (HC)

United India Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Mohammad Yunus and ors.

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Decided on : May-17-2002

Reported in : 2002(5)MPHT508; 2002(4)MPLJ28

..... observed that while impleading the insurance company, the claimant is enabled by law to know the exact terms of the policy, even though he was not a party to the contract of indemnity. if the claimant, however, fails to inspect the policy of insurance and to allege that the insurance policy covers liability in excess of the statutory limit, the matter should ..... passengers, the same is referable to the statutory liability of rs. 15,000/- per passenger under section 95 (2) (b) (ii) of the 'act', in the absence of any special contract.17. in amritlal sood and anr. v. kaushalya devi thapar and ors. [(1998) 3 scc 744], there was a collision between two vehicles. one of the vehicles was a car .....

Tag this Judgment!


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