{"id":172732,"date":"2010-09-23T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-09-22T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-india-insurance-co-ltd-vs-smt-fathima-bi-on-23-september-2010"},"modified":"2017-03-21T02:06:33","modified_gmt":"2017-03-20T20:36:33","slug":"united-india-insurance-co-ltd-vs-smt-fathima-bi-on-23-september-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-india-insurance-co-ltd-vs-smt-fathima-bi-on-23-september-2010","title":{"rendered":"United India Insurance Co Ltd … vs Smt Fathima Bi on 23 September, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
United India Insurance Co Ltd … vs Smt Fathima Bi on 23 September, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: H.G.Ramesh And K.N.Keshavanarayana<\/div>\n
 \n\nMFA.NOS.11186\/O5\nC\/W 11187\/05 & 11188\/{)5\n\nIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA\nCIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD\n\nDATED THIS T!IE 2312\u00bb DAY 01: sEpTEMBE12..2i31b'  \" \nPRESENT ' 'V \" \n\nTHE HON'BLE MR.JUsT1c:E~ILc3;.R.%\u00a7M.3\u00a7S:I~iI.   \n\n \n\n . . .\nTHE HON'BLE MR.JUsT1cE'2gfN.K\u00a3:$1iAvA1stA'T\u00e9;A'arAnIA3\n\nM.F.A.NO. 111861OF 2{105 C\/\"W. ' I\nM.\u00a5?.A.NQ. 1118A'i\"\"GF' 2O05_AND\n\nM.F.A.NQ[\"'311\u00a3.38 \u00a7)F 2\u20ac)_O5 (MV)\n\nIN M.F.A.NO. 11186 or 2005    '\n\n = \n<\/pre>\n
UNITED INDIA\u00a71NSU.RA~NC_E  LTD”; ”<\/p>\n
BELLARY DO A i__  ‘ ‘   ._  <\/p>\n
# 25, sHAN2<A9RAr4AARA1:iA.NAA–Bt;:LD1N–es;"<\/p>\n
M . GROAD, BANGA\u00bb1_,oRE'–5@o' 0.0 1.<\/p>\n
REP. BY ITS AASsIsT'Am?_M.AN'Ag}E:.R' '<\/p>\n
SMT. SHOBHA RAJEND1f<A_P12As,AD. …APPELLANT<\/p>\n
(BY sR1.s.s.KdL\u00ab\u00a3wAD F-QR-A
\nSRI.f;Zs';vCL,SEET'HAVRA1\\J{ RAG, AD'v'OCA"\u00a3'ES}<\/p>\n
   V
\n' ._ '-xIy*,ro'G.'M_r_:r13Es'0o13 SAB,
\nA AGE3D.AB-OUT 34 YEARS,<\/p>\n
V si\\xr'\u00a3.JA1–1:RA,
\n AA TAGEQ. ABOUT 57 YEARS,<\/p>\n
AA ta<\/p>\n
  \u00bb _\u00bbKi;1'M.SHAME3ENA B1,
\n AGED ABOUT 14 YEARS
\n D\/O MEHBOOB SAB,<\/p>\n
CHLHUSSAIN,<\/p>\n
MFA.NoS.11186\/O5
\nC\/W 11187\/O5 8: 11188\/05<\/p>\n
AGED ABOUT 12 YEARS,
\nS\/O MEBBOOB SAB,<\/p>\n
5. CHLMUNNA,
\nAGED ABOUT 10 YEARS,
\nS\/O MEHBOOB SAB,<\/p>\n
6. CE-ELSHABBIR PASHA,   ~
\nAGED ABOUT 8 YEARS, I
\n13\/0 MEHBOOB SAB,<\/p>\n
RESPONDENTS NO.3 TO 6 BEING’M’I~NORS,*.. , _
\nREPTD BY THEIR MOTHER THE I RE,,S’PONDENT_
\nALL ARE RESIDENTS GANIKEHAL VILL.AG3%3x, ”
\nBELLARY TALUK 85 DISTRICT.  ..  <\/p>\n
7. THE DIVISIONAL CON’TROI.I;–ER,. ;
\nI<SRTC,BELLARY DIVISION,  I
\nBELLARY.\n<\/p>\n
8. MR.ABDUL?_KHEJD_DUS,  , “” ”
\nMAJOR,,~Sy’C\u00ab._AB.D”(;L SA1I.._AM,, _
\nRESIDINS AT No.51\/5_o’,\u00bb) ._
\nwARD__NO;=T5,  CROSS, MIL-L.ARI’>ET,
\nBEI;LARY.~.  _  .\n<\/p>\n
(OWNER OF AUTO’BEAvRI’NG’NO.I<A–34\/34 12)
\n . .     _..RESPONDEN'I'S<\/p>\n
(BY SRLRAVI {r;\u00ab–.I\u00a2IOSM'ANIA,'.,ADYOCATE FOR R8
\nR1 E: R2 SERV}I3D,"' '
\nR3. \u00abTO R6 ARE MI-DIQRSVAND REP. BY R1}<\/p>\n
 *.TIIIS APREAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT<\/p>\n
AGAIINST,,T}~EEJUDG*MENT AND AWARD DA'I'ED:16.08.2005 PASSED
\nIN"-MW; .NO..21,_l\/V2001 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER, MAC'I'–II,
\nBELLARY, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.3,50,000\/~ WITH<\/p>\n
  INTEREST 6%, P.\/–\\. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL DEPOSIT.\n<\/p>\n
–  =1\\IIA.F.A.I\u00a7i\u20ac), :’1 1 187 OF 2005
\n UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO, LTD,<\/p>\n
, BELLARY DO
\n A #25, SHANKARANARAYANA BUILDINGS,<\/p>\n
MFA.NoS.11186\/O5
\nC\/W 11187\/{)5 & 11188\/G5<\/p>\n
M.G.ROAD, BANGALORE~56O 00}.
\nREP. BY ITS ASSISTANT MANAGER 1
\nSMT. SHOBHA RAJENDRA PRASAD. <\/p>\n
{BY SRI.S.S.KOLIWAD FOR
\nSR1. E3.C.SEETI-IARAM RAO, ADVOCATES}<\/p>\n
AND:   –\n<\/p>\n
1. SMTMEHABOOE BI,<\/p>\n
W\/O ERAJA SAB,
\nAGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,<\/p>\n
2. MR.B.BHAKSHA SAB,
\nAGED ABOUT 69 YEARS,<\/p>\n
3. MR. SHASHA SAB,
\nAGED ABOUT 19 YEARS; V ,
\nS\/O RAJA SAB,  .\n<\/p>\n
4. cHT.MEHEOORii,’SAE,,  ._
\nAGED AB’OU’F_ 14- ~’2r,EAR_S,__
\nS\/O RAJA SA_B;,_ ” ‘ <\/p>\n
5. CHI’,ASD’UL;SV5S_AB,5,S’ _  .
\nAGED ABOu’T.1:2.,TEARS, , ‘<\/p>\n
S\/O ‘RAJA SA.B,*.  _ <\/p>\n
5. KUM.GH~OUS.EBT,  .\n<\/p>\n
AGED ABOUT_ 10 ‘YEARS,
\nEgo, RAJA SAB; A _____ _, .\n<\/p>\n
IA’-RESPONEENTS.1$rO..4, 5 8:, 6 BEING MINORS,
\nRERTE_ BY TEE;.R’1\\AOTHER TRE I RESPONDENT.
\nALL,A1′?:’E RES1ID.EN.TS MINCHERI VILLAGE,<\/p>\n
  BEZLLARY TALU:<1_&"DISTR1cT.<\/p>\n
 T, THE TJIVISIONAL CONTROLLER,
\n  KSR'FC;BELLARY DIVISION,
\n" VTEELLARY.\n<\/p>\n
  MR.AEDUT. KHUDDUS,
\n : MAJOR, S\/O ABDUL SALAM,
\n7 RESIDING AT NOS:\/50,
\nWARD N015, 3% CROSS, MILLARPET,<\/p>\n
5959X9’\/7’\/>’r”(\u20ac-7)?)\/\\\/\u00e9;-a\/~\u00bb\u00bb::\u00bb.. .<\/p>\n
4. . 5ND: ~ ‘<\/p>\n
MFA.NOS.iii86\/05
\nC\/W 11187\/GS & 11188\/05<\/p>\n
BELLARY.\n<\/p>\n
{OWNER OF AUTOBEARING NO,KA–34\/3412) ,
\n RESPONDENT,S’=._<\/p>\n
[BY SRI.Y.LAKSHMIKANTH REDDY, ADVZFOR _.
\nR1 TO R3 (R4~–R6 REP. BY R1)  ‘
\nSRIVIJAY KUMAR ADV. FOR R
\nR-8 SERVED)   ..\n<\/p>\n
THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER “SEC’TIO’N 2}j’?’?\u00a7{i.,}’: OI\u00ab~\u00bbv”\\;\u00a7;;.x,f”AcT
\nAGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND A,wARD’wDAT.ED;I6,.0: .2005 PASSED<\/p>\n
IN MVC NO210\/2001 ON THE*FIL.E OFATHE, M’EMk3ER.,,,,\u00a3i:~MACT,’<\/p>\n
BELLARY, AWARDING COMPENSATION OI\u00ab*–,RS.,3′,:42;QGo\/m WITH
\nINTEREST  5% PA. FROM THE “DATE OFPETITION TILL ITS
\nREALISATION.   –.\n<\/p>\n
IN M.F.A.N0. 1 1 133 or 2o<")r7 , –. 1'<\/p>\n
BETWEEN:   '
\nUNITEDINDIAINS:UR;AINCE,OOf,.LTD_..,V  V
\nBELLARY DO
\n# 25, SHANKAR.9INA_I~"{AYAN\u00bbX BUI.LDINGS,
\nIvI.G.ROAD, _B.ANG;ALO'RE:5EG_ 001. ' *- — "
\nREP. BY ITS ASSISTANT ;MANAGI:)R<\/p>\n
SMT. SIIOBIIA RAJENDRA _I\u00e9IsLASA.D'. ' …APPELLANT
\n(BY SRI.S.S.I{OLIwAD'~I\u00ab'O'R' ..  V<\/p>\n
SRI. B.C.SEEfI'HARA'M RAG; ADVOCATE.)<\/p>\n
 , 'IASRI.GUNITI\u00a7\u00a5IAKAL RAJA SAB,<\/p>\n
* S'\/O PATEL SAB,<\/p>\n
.  A'B.OUT'49 YEARS,<\/p>\n
' . RESIDEN'fT__OF MICIIERI VILLAGE,
\nBELLA' 'IITALUK &, DISTRICT.<\/p>\n
~  THE DIIIISIONAL CONTROLLER,<\/p>\n
 " 'K-SRTC, BELLARY DIVISION,
\nI. BELLARY.\n<\/p>\n
   MRABDUL KHUDDUS,<\/p>\n
V MAJOR S \/O ABDUL SALAM,
\nRESIDING AT No.51,\/50,<\/p>\n
MFA.NOS.11186\/05
\nC\/W 11187\/05 8L 11188\/O5<\/p>\n
WARD NO.1.3, 3*”? CROSS. MILLARPET,
\nBELLARY.\n<\/p>\n
(OWNER OF AUTO BEARING NO.K.A~34\/3412) A
\n V.\n<\/p>\n
(SRI.Y.LAKSI-IMIKANTH REJDDY, ADVFOR R1
\nSR1. RAVI V. I-IOSMANI, ADVFOR R2,
\nR3–SER\\\/ED)   ..\n<\/p>\n
THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER ‘SI3cfrIoI\\I i7.3′(*t_):” Q15 .7iI,Txf’ACT
\nAGAINST TRE JUDGMENT AND AWARD ‘DA’rED:16.oS,2oc5 I??ASSE)’D<\/p>\n
IN MVC NO.275\/2001 ON THE VFILE OF’-THE’  HH9~MACTJ,’<\/p>\n
BELLARY, AWARDING coMPSNSAT”I.QN oi-T. RS_.;I4,’eoo\/M WITH
\nINTEREST  6% RA. FROM THE DATE; OF PETITION To TILL ITS
\nREALISATION.\n<\/p>\n
THESE) APPEALS C()”MI’N–G”~Q\u00a3\u00a7\u00a7.ViF0’RA.V:i_A0M_1SSION THIS DAY,<\/p>\n
K.N.KESHAVANARAY’ANA.J., D’ELIv,ER:eD.—THE ..}?QL~,t.OWIN G:
\nJUD–GMENA_:-.”~ T.\n<\/p>\n
I. These t}1f0\u20ac3’V.;\u00a7tppciatiSV:.by’.\ufb02%IeV,:i1’1S1,1I’8.1’1C{‘3 Company are<\/p>\n
directed judgment dated 16.08.2005<\/p>\n
passed by   Bellary in MVC No.21}\/2001,<\/p>\n
S 2 I0 \/2oo1 and 2V?”E3\/1200’ I .<\/p>\n
 _D’_I’he_V”‘acciider1j.t in question. occurred on account of<\/p>\n
  collision  autorikshaw insured with the appeliant<\/p>\n
 a b.”u.siA:’be1or1ging to Karnataka State Road Transport<\/p>\n
“‘~C;orpora’.tion. In respect of this accident, eight claim<\/p>\n
i’:’p.e,t_i.?:ionS were filed. In the accident, two passengers<\/p>\n
i<\/p>\n
\u00a7~2F”A.\u00a3\\ios.IlE86\/\u00a335
\nC\/W 11187\/05 8: 11188\/OS<\/p>\n
travelling in the autorikshaw died and others sustained<\/p>\n
injuries. The heirs of the two deceased persons filedclaim<\/p>\n
petitions seeking compensation for the de_at’h’-\u00abi.of.:_”tho’se<\/p>\n
persons while the injured persons claimed’–<:om'pen'satio11__for <\/p>\n
the personal injuries suffered by  ffhep.ctl.aim"petitii:ons<\/p>\n
were filed against the owner and_ insurer of ?.l'l(\u00a7:f\\1\u00a5.tQIl..l{Sha\\&'i'<\/p>\n
as well as the Karnataka State  '–ITranspo.rtv.Corporation.<\/p>\n
3. The appe1lant–lnsti1*er-. _  ll\ufb01intorikshaw contested
\nthe claim petitions.__ inter\u00e9aiia cloenttendirirgl that as per the
\nterms of the :_p’olic__y;3eitsV  limited to three passengers
\nonlye as-,such,llit7is\u00bb.notliableto satisfy the claims of all the<\/p>\n
claimants  l’l’ial5ipl1ty:l”‘i\u00bbsrestricted only to three claims.<\/p>\n
__\u00a3t was.a1so.conten._ded that the accident occurred due to the<\/p>\n
7-.soie~.tleg1igenee.regt” the driver of the KSRTC Bus. The<\/p>\n
Tribtiiial tori?-assessment of oral as well as documentary<\/p>\n
evidence’,  the common judgment disposed of all the eight<\/p>\n
 claimiepgetitions holding that the accident was due to the\n<\/p>\n
–Cfom~posite negligence of the driver of the Autorikshaw as well<\/p>\n
 driver of the bus. The negligence was apportioned in<\/p>\n
 \/er<\/p>\n
MFA.No$.21186\/O5
\nC\/W 1587\/85 8: 11188\/O5<\/p>\n
the ratio of 50:50 between these two drivers. The Tribunal<\/p>\n
after quantifying the compensation payable in eaeh~wo’f.Vt’hese<\/p>\n
cases directed the appellanblnsurance Company.etVo’e-llsatilsfy<\/p>\n
the award in each of the cases to the”‘ex.tent  \\}vhi’leVi’1.1\u00abqei T <\/p>\n
remaining 50% should be satisfied_’ <\/p>\n
app ellan tw In surance Company ‘  qu es ti
\nrespect of three cases   lN’os’.b10\/2001,
\n211\/2001 and 2’75\/2OC)lll.l  of other
\nclaim petitions\u00a7..hairVe.noieheeri  the appellant-
\nInsurance  that awards in all those<\/p>\n
cases areless   no appeal lies.<\/p>\n
4. MFAl’No.*] relates to MVC No.211\/2001<\/p>\n
while  1  relates to MVC No.210\/2001 and<\/p>\n
iii’-.M1\u00e9*Av.\u00ab1xi e. 1.88:\/2_OO5 relates to MVC No.2’75 \/2001. The first<\/p>\n
tvro~.appealeifpeijztain to the cases of death while the third<\/p>\n
 V appeall”‘1″e1atesllto the case of injury.<\/p>\n
 have heard Sri.S.S.Koliwad, learned counsel<\/p>\n
 ‘:”app_earing for the appellant and perused the records,<\/p>\n
I3<\/p>\n
MFA.N0s.1l186\/O5
\nC\/W 11187\/{)5 & 11188\/O5<\/p>\n
6. Though learned counsel vehemently contended,’ that<\/p>\n
the finding of the Tribunal that the accident egithe
\ncomposite negligence of both the drivers
\nperusing the evidence on record,
\nTribunal is justified in recofdirlg
\nappellant–Insurance Company  any evidence
\nto substantiate its  was solely
\ndue to the negligence   bus. The
\n1631′ flfid    appreciation of
\nthe evidence,   the accident was due to
\nthe composite. drivers of both the vehicles.
\nWe find Jisaid finding nor we find any\n<\/p>\n
4._,Vground}\u20acto interfei*e_.yylit’hv:the said finding. In addition to this,
\n  that the appe11ant–Insurance Company has
\n  finding in this regard in respect of other
\n As such, this finding has become final in
\n respec-t,,pofiiiother claim petitions. Therefore, the appellant-
\n Company is estopped from contending that the<\/p>\n
a\/<\/p>\n
M?A.NOS.11186\/BS
\nC\/W 1387\/05 8: 11188\/OS<\/p>\n
said finding is erroneous only in respect of these claim<\/p>\n
petitions. Therefore, the said contention fails.<\/p>\n
7. The other contentions with regard to.
\niiabiiity to the extent of three
\nthough the appeliantlnsurance   <\/p>\n
of objections filed before the”Tri–,buna1′,v.
\nplea in this regard, it has  .ei(idAe\u00a7nce either
\noral and documentary contention.<\/p>\n
In the absence  opinion, the
\nTribunal is   thatithe”appel1ant–Insurance<\/p>\n
Cornpanjr is  the claim in respect of these
\nthree petitiionstoi  50%. We find no error in the
\n__said f,1..1_\u00a7j’1:idiiJU.I1.g. it  noticed from the records of the
\n tiieu appe\ufb02antdnsurance Company has already
\nsiatisi1’edi  sigma passed in Mvc Nos.210\/2001 823<\/p>\n
 it 211\/  depositing its share of compensation as
\n the Tribunal and the amount so deposited by the
\n app’eiiant–insurance Company has already been disbursed to<\/p>\n
 claimants in terms of the award. The appeI1ant–<\/p>\n
{‘3<\/p>\n
MFA.%\\$<3s.11186\/G5
\nC\/W 11187\/G5 8: 11188\/GS<\/p>\n
:10:<\/span><\/p>\n
Insurance Company having satisfied the award passed in<\/p>\n
two cases involving death, it is not open to it to contVen_d;t_Vhat<\/p>\n
it is not liable to satisfy the award. Having  <\/p>\n
above facts, we find no merit in these appe’a1s._:*\u00bb.fFherefore;u9 <\/p>\n
the appeals are dismissed. Statutory’;”de3posif\ufb01s._.Vif’are<\/p>\n
ordered to be transmitted to t’h_e Tiribimai iforii’<\/p>\n
disbursement.\n<\/p>\n
‘.\n<\/p>\n
   inner:\n<\/p>\n
Jm\/~\u00bb<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court United India Insurance Co Ltd … vs Smt Fathima Bi on 23 September, 2010 Author: H.G.Ramesh And K.N.Keshavanarayana MFA.NOS.11186\/O5 C\/W 11187\/05 & 11188\/{)5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD DATED THIS T!IE 2312\u00bb DAY 01: sEpTEMBE12..2i31b’ ” PRESENT ‘ ‘V ” THE HON’BLE MR.JUsT1c:E~ILc3;.R.%\u00a7M.3\u00a7S:I~iI. . . . THE […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-172732","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nUnited India Insurance Co Ltd ... vs Smt Fathima Bi on 23 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-india-insurance-co-ltd-vs-smt-fathima-bi-on-23-september-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"United India Insurance Co Ltd ... vs Smt Fathima Bi on 23 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-india-insurance-co-ltd-vs-smt-fathima-bi-on-23-september-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-09-22T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-03-20T20:36:33+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/united-india-insurance-co-ltd-vs-smt-fathima-bi-on-23-september-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/united-india-insurance-co-ltd-vs-smt-fathima-bi-on-23-september-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"United India Insurance Co Ltd … vs Smt Fathima Bi on 23 September, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-09-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-03-20T20:36:33+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/united-india-insurance-co-ltd-vs-smt-fathima-bi-on-23-september-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1634,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/united-india-insurance-co-ltd-vs-smt-fathima-bi-on-23-september-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/united-india-insurance-co-ltd-vs-smt-fathima-bi-on-23-september-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/united-india-insurance-co-ltd-vs-smt-fathima-bi-on-23-september-2010\",\"name\":\"United India Insurance Co Ltd ... vs Smt Fathima Bi on 23 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-09-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-03-20T20:36:33+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/united-india-insurance-co-ltd-vs-smt-fathima-bi-on-23-september-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/united-india-insurance-co-ltd-vs-smt-fathima-bi-on-23-september-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/united-india-insurance-co-ltd-vs-smt-fathima-bi-on-23-september-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"United India Insurance Co Ltd … vs Smt Fathima Bi on 23 September, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"United India Insurance Co Ltd ... vs Smt Fathima Bi on 23 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-india-insurance-co-ltd-vs-smt-fathima-bi-on-23-september-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"United India Insurance Co Ltd ... vs Smt Fathima Bi on 23 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-india-insurance-co-ltd-vs-smt-fathima-bi-on-23-september-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-09-22T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-03-20T20:36:33+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-india-insurance-co-ltd-vs-smt-fathima-bi-on-23-september-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-india-insurance-co-ltd-vs-smt-fathima-bi-on-23-september-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"United India Insurance Co Ltd … vs Smt Fathima Bi on 23 September, 2010","datePublished":"2010-09-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-03-20T20:36:33+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-india-insurance-co-ltd-vs-smt-fathima-bi-on-23-september-2010"},"wordCount":1634,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-india-insurance-co-ltd-vs-smt-fathima-bi-on-23-september-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-india-insurance-co-ltd-vs-smt-fathima-bi-on-23-september-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-india-insurance-co-ltd-vs-smt-fathima-bi-on-23-september-2010","name":"United India Insurance Co Ltd ... vs Smt Fathima Bi on 23 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-09-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-03-20T20:36:33+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-india-insurance-co-ltd-vs-smt-fathima-bi-on-23-september-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-india-insurance-co-ltd-vs-smt-fathima-bi-on-23-september-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-india-insurance-co-ltd-vs-smt-fathima-bi-on-23-september-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"United India Insurance Co Ltd … vs Smt Fathima Bi on 23 September, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/172732","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=172732"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/172732\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=172732"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=172732"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=172732"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}