SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2011 Supreme(Kar) 156

D.V.SHYLENDRA KUMAR
Divisional Manager – Appellant
Versus
Prakash – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared
For the Petitioner:S.K. Kayakamath, Advocate.
For the Respondents: --------

Judgment :-

1. Appeal by the insurance company under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, the Act), to wriggle out of the joint liability in terms of the order and award dated 14-6-2010 passed in MVC No 544 of 2006, on the file of Addl Civil Judge & AMACT, Ranebennur, on the most frivolous and cantankerous ground of the person who was driving the vehicle – an autocab – permitted to carry three passengers in addition to the driver, was not duly licenced to drive that vehicle, though such person did hold a valid licence to drive a “transport vehicle” as endorsed on the very licence.

2. It is formaking home this contention, Sri S K Kayakmath, learned counsel for the appellant, has very vehemently contended that the condition of the policy was that the driver driving the vehicle covered under the insurance should hold a valid licence; that a defence to the effect that the driver did not hold a valid licence is available to the insurance company even in terms of the provisions of Section 149(2) (a) (ii) of the Act, reading as under:

149. Duty of insurers to satisfy judgments and awards against persons insured in respect of third party risks.-

(1) xx

(2) No sum sha



















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top