(Spl.-H.C.A.S v. Nicolletta Rohtagi & Chandigarh vs. Nicolletta Rohtagi & Chandigarh vs. Nicolletta Rohtagi
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 23 Sep 2004
- Bench
- B H MARLAPALLE
Provisions considered
- Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 s. 149(2)
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA APPELLATE SIDE FIRST APPEAL NO. 188 OF 2004 --------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Note, Office Memoranda of Quorum, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Court’s or Judge’s Orders Mr. A.R.S. Netravalkar, advocate for the appellant. CORAM : B. H. MARLAPALLE, J. DATE : 23rd September, 2004. P.C.: Heard Mr. Netravalkar, learned counsel for the appellant, Insurance Company. The Award impugned in this Appeal is not challenged on any of the grounds which are available to the Insurance Company under Section 149 (2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and, therefore, in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd., National Insurance Co. Ltd., National Insurance Co. Ltd., vs. Nicolletta Rohtagi & Chandigarh vs. Nicolletta Rohtagi & Chandigarh vs. Nicolletta Rohtagi & Chandigarh Ors., 2002 AIRSCW 3899, this appeal Ors. Ors. cannot be entertained and the same is hereby dismissed in limine. B. H. MARLAPALLE, J.
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — s. 149(2).
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 23 Sep 2004. The bench was B H MARLAPALLE.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.