VISWANATHA SASTRY, J.

( 1 ) THE short point that arises in this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal involves an interpretation of Section 95 of the Motor Vehicles Act.

( 2 ) THE facts giving rise to this appeal are briefly as follows : The Hindustan Ideal Insurance Company Ltd. , Hyderabad, the 2nd respondent in the lower Court, is the appellant herein. The predecessor-in-title of the petitioners in the lower Court was involved in an accident on 24-2-1969 in the lorry APK 5105 belonging to the first respondent in the lower Court who is now impleaded as the 6th respondent herein. The petitioners alleged that on account of the vehicle, it ended in an accident causing the death of Sivaramaiah, the predecessor-in-title of the petitioners.

( 3 ) IN the lower Court the Insurance Company contested the petition raising the pleas that there was no negligence on the part of the driver and also raising the following plea in paragraph 6 :"this respondent submits that in view of the agreed conditions regarding limitations as to use of the vehicle viz. , that the vehicle should be used only under a Public Carrier Permit within the meaning of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 and that the policy does not cover

Click Here to Read the rest of this document